Albus Dumbledore: Character Analysis

"Nitwit! Blubber! Oddment! Tweak!"

I've always loved Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore's (http://www.hp-lexicon.org/wizards/dumbledore.html) character from the very beginning. Dumbledore played such a large and important role throughout the series as both a mentor and a guide for Harry. Ever since the start, the wizened Headmaster of Hogwarts has always been there for Harry. And in HBP we witness his tragic death. Some discussion questions on our favorite Headmaster to get the discussion started:1. What are your general thoughts on Dumbledore as a character through books 1-6? Do you see a difference in his behavior and/or actions between the books?

2. What do we know or can we guess of Dumbledore's past? What was his family like - was he married and did he have children? What kind of parentage did he come from? What was his relationship with Aberforth like?

3. What exactly were Dumbledore's dealings with Grindelwald like? Did he actually kill Grindelwald, or just defeat him? Will this be of any future importance in the books?

4. How did Dumbledore know James & Lily had been killed so quickly after it happened? How did he know Lily had invoked "ancient magic" with her sacrifice? (He must have known because he instructed Hagrid to bring Harry to Privet Drive). What methods did Dumbledore employ in watching over Harry during his time at the Dursleys?

5. Loyalty - specifically loyalty to Dumbledore - is a theme that has been emphasized many times throughout the books. We've seen Harry's loyalty to Dumbledore call Fawkes to him in a time of dire need. Harry refers to himself as "Dumbledore's man through and through". Why is loyalty to Dumbledore such an important theme in the books? Will loyalty to Dumbledore play an important role for Harry book 7 as he hunts for the horcruxes and battle's Voldemort?

6. Throughout the books, Dumbledore seems to always be teaching Harry something, but his lessons are sometimes hidden and subtle. What do you believe are the most important lessons Dumbledore taught Harry? Did Dumbledore adequately prepare Harry for the trials that lie ahead in book 7? Is there anything you think Dumbledore should have told Harry before he died?

7. Will Dumbledore continue to play a role in book 7 despite his death? Will he be able to help Harry from beyond the grave? If so, how?Please remember that this is a discussion thread. All criticism should be constructive. You can say "Dumbledore made a mistake when he did such and such.", but not "Dumbledore is a senile old fool". Posts that are considered bashing may be deleted by staff.

Aww! :( The Dumbledore thread is deserted! I love this character! I'll start the discussion.

I have a theory on Dumbledore: I think that maybe the reason Dumbledore trusts people is because he is lonely and is almost building a "family" around him. The way he treats certain characters speaks of an almost paternal or grandfather-like relationship. Anyone else see this?


6. ...Is there anything you think Dumbledore should have told Harry before he died?


Yeah. Why do you trust Snape and how are Horcruxes destroyed? :lol:

I have a theory on Dumbledore: I think that maybe the reason Dumbledore trusts people is because he is lonely and is almost building a "family" around him. The way he treats certain characters speaks of an almost paternal or grandfather-like relationship. Anyone else see this?That's a very interesting theory. :tu: Since we don't know very much about Dumbledore's family except that he had a brother, it's possible his family might not have been the greatest, or his parents could have died when he was young. Also, it's possible he may not have married (or if he did, that his wife died much earlier). If this is true, then I could see that loneliness contributing to his willingness to trust others.

Or (this is a kind of out-there theory that I'm not sure I believe), what if Dumbledore made a mistake earlier in his life (which could have been what Dumbledore relived when he drank the green potion?), and as a result is tolerant of others and is willing to trust them because someone he cared about gave him a second chance? As I said, I don't really think I believe that, but it's interesting to speculate on Dumbledore's past.

In the end, it seems very likely that Dumbledore's willingness to trust is simply a part of what makes him who he is. Dumbledore is a very gentle, kindly person who just seems to be very intuitive of other people and being able to guess things about them. He just strikes me as someone with lots of wisdom, but who still doesn't know everything and doesn't pretend he knows everything. That's one of the reasons I like him a lot - he doesn't boast of his knowledge (though he does give himself credit at times) and doesn't believe he knows everything. And he puts his knowledge to good use.

Or (this is a kind of out-there theory that I'm not sure I believe), what if Dumbledore made a mistake earlier in his life (which could have been what Dumbledore relived when he drank the green potion?), and as a result is tolerant of others and is willing to trust them because someone he cared about gave him a second chance? As I said, I don't really think I believe that, but it's interesting to speculate on Dumbledore's past.

I don't think that's very "out there". It's entirely possible.
That would mean that Dumbledore is able to see through two viewpoints: The truster and the trustee.

Though it does lead me to wonder...What would that regret be, and who forgave him?
If his family is dead, the regret could have something to do with that...:huh:

Dumbledore is one of my favorite characters in the series. He's all that and a bag of chips, to steal an expression.

I like Dumbledore. He's the type of character/person I would delight in evenings spent having drinks and discussing cabbages and kings. He is an old soul, filled with the wisdom of his years and experience, yet equally filled with compassion, curiosity and humor. And an inner integrity that makes him the most loyal of friends and the original Dumbledore's man.

There is a depth to Dumbledore's character: His trust is not easily given: he always watched Riddle, he doesn't really trust Slughorn and he only admitted Ron and Hermione to the inner sanctum after repeatedly prooving themselves Harry's friends. Once his trust is won, it is given unconditionally. That's why when he says he trusts someone completely, I am with him. I trust that character too..

He is an immensely gifted and powerful wizard, probably the greatest of his age, yet he chooses not to defeat Voldemort on Voldemort's own dark terms. He remains true to what is good, and light and right even in the most tragic times, and I believe he urges Harry and all those arond him to do so as well.

We see his benevolence and whimsy but we must never underestimate him. His flash of anger at Voldemort revealed a glimpse of power within that was awesome in the fullest sense of the word "full of awe". He is a force to be reckoned with. Woe to those who misjudge him.

Dumbledore is authoritative, not authoritarian; gentle with a steel resolve, humorous with a hard won knowledge of the tragic nature of life. He is a lightening bolt of brilliance that can barely be contained in his ancient body. And he is slightly mad because he is at once so very human and so very separated from the average state of being by his gifts, insight and astonishing intellect.

Opening statement
I'm frankly surprised that this thread is not hotter:p But anyway, I believe that Dumbledore was intended to be a mentor to Harry, which would die off later in the series to teach Harry that he has to do this on his own. He just seemed like a really good and quirky guy and it was a shame he died, though definitly nessasary for Harry's growth:)

I'm frankly surprised that this thread is not hotter:p

I am too. There's a lot to be said for Dumbledore, and also a lot to speculate on. :huh:

1. What are your general thoughts on Dumbledore as a character through books 1-6? Do you see a difference in his behavior and/or actions between the books?

Including my analysis of Dumbledore
He's a great mentor for Harry and all the students. He genuinely cares and if it hadn't been for him looking out for Harry's best interests things would be alot worse for him. His behavior has changed slightly throughout the books. I think it's good that his character still shows growth even though he origionally came off as all knowing to me for me. He is not infallible and can make mistakes. He is very trusting, and endearingly eccentric.

2. What do we know or can we guess of Dumbledore's past? What was his family like - was he married and did he have children? What kind of parentage did he come from? What was his relationship with Aberforth like?
We can guess in the past that he has suffered great loss or made a big mistake that caused others to suffer (judging by the effect of the potion in the cave). He may have lingering guilt. We know he has a brother named Aberforth, and that they are very different from one another. I think he may have been married at one time before the war involving Grindelwald. I am only speculating though.

3. What exactly were Dumbledore's dealings with Grindelwald like? Did he actually kill Grindelwald, or just defeat him? Will this be of any future importance in the books?
Hmm, we know that he defeated him, but I never considered that that may not imply that he killed him. I'm not sure. If he did that would say that his soul is torn and I never got that impression from him. I'm guessing he did not kill him due to the tactics he used on Voldemort at the DoM. I think this may foreshadow tactics Harry will use in the war against Voldemort.

5.Why is loyalty to Dumbledore such an important theme in the books?
Dumbledore is the opposite of Voldemort in the way that he is perceived as the only one Voldemort is afraid of. He represents everything that Voldemort is not. I think that loyalty to him can be symbolic in that way but it goes much deeper for those who actually know him. He is a fatherly figure to Harry too and everyone that meets him respects him.


6. Did Dumbledore adequately prepare Harry for the trials that lie ahead in book 7? Is there anything you think Dumbledore should have told Harry before he died?
I sincerely hope so. It would be a shame if he didn't have the time to tell him something extremely important.




In the end, it seems very likely that Dumbledore's willingness to trust is simply a part of what makes him who he is. Dumbledore is a very gentle, kindly person who just seems to be very intuitive of other people and being able to guess things about them. He just strikes me as someone with lots of wisdom, but who still doesn't know everything and doesn't pretend he knows everything. That's one of the reasons I like him a lot - he doesn't boast of his knowledge (though he does give himself credit at times) and doesn't believe he knows everything. And he puts his knowledge to good use.

:clap: I agree with this statement. At times I felt that it would seem that he is just too trusting, but this is a good view of his personality.

My Personal Statement about Dumbledore

Dumbledore is such a presence in the books, and means so much to Harry, and so much to me as a reader, that I don't know where to start. He's the "wise old man," the mentor, father-figure, and grandfather. He's also very child-like and gentle, and funny! I'm always impressed with his dignity and patience, and I think he'd rather be remembered as a good human being than the "greatest wizard of his age." Humility - that's what Dumbledore is all about - he's very "Gandhi-like" in his approach to things. He expects people to rise to the occasion and think outside the box. He gives people his trust, but he expects their best in return, yet he knows how to forgive people their failings. I find him inspirational and very hopeful.

I realize this sounds like a Hallmark Card, but I can't seem to find a flaw in Dumbledore. I know that many people were disappointed in his trust in Snape, and felt he let down his guard too much and met his doom for it. Others see him as more of a manipulator who is willing to use any means to defeat Voldemort, even putting Harry in danger time after time. But the truth is, Harry's always been in danger, and the fact that Dumbledore offered to be the Potters' Secret Keeper means that he's always been willing to die for Harry. And I could never see that Dumbledore "used" anyone - employed them, yes, to do whatever they could for the school or for the Order. And he did trust people to the point of being naive, yet that's a sign he had faith in people, and believed that a little faith could make people better, and that's not a bad thing - that's a good thing.

Ignisia: I love your idea about Dumbledore "building a family." :)

Opening statement
I'm frankly surprised that this thread is not hotter:)
Oh, I think I do. What can be said about Dumbledore that we haven't already said?

He was the ultimate master of gentility. From the very first sight of him in Philosopher's Stone, as he walked along in a muggle neighborhood towards the home of Vernon and Petunia Dursley, he presented a sense of invinsibility, of strength, of other-worldliness. He carried himself as if he was unaware of his greatness, unaware that others might be curious about him, or afraid of him, or admire him. He was unconcerned about how he fit into his surroundings. He was unassuming. Yet despite this appearance of, shall we say, humility, he was quite aware of just how powerful he was.

We know a lot about Albus Dumbledore. There are hints and clues throughout the books about his life. But Albus was discreet. He expressed only what he wished to say. He chose his words carefully. He chose the times to use those words carefully. And so, we know that Albus gave us information that he wanted us to have...I would imagine that Albus was the kind of individual who believed that too much information is a dangerous thing, that too much information makes it more difficult for a person to prioritize what is important and what is not. Therefore, what Albus has told us about himself, I believe, is the important information. What he hasn't yet told us may not be critical to solving the problems at hand. It may be critical to future problems....but not the ones Harry is currently facing.

So what do we know about him? He trusted Severus Snape. When he looked in the Mirror of Erised he saw socks. He has a scar in the shape of the London underground. He defeated Grindelwald. He has a brother who performed illegal charms on a goat. He frequents the Hogs Head. He recruited Tom Riddle. He taught transfiguration. He knows about horcruxes. He has acted to destroy the existing horcruxes and has given Harry all the information he could possibly give him about the horcruxes. He trusts Hagrid with his life. His patronus is a phoenix. He spoke mermish, among other languages. He had a pensieve. He protected Harry during Harry's formative years. He knows ancient magic. He gave evidence against Sirius. He had James' invisibility cloak. He formed the Order of the Phoenix. He loved Harry Potter.

Deep down, underneath it all, there exists all the information about the whys and the wherefores of who he was in life. But I think it might not matter....because all he wanted to do was give Harry the information needed to fulfill Harry's ultimate goal...the defeat of Voldemort.

Dumbledore is a character that left mysteries still untold. His wisdom, his courage, his care and devotion to protecting the innocent and teaching the next generation of mad wizards and witches is second to non. As already mentions his trust does not come easy. His mistrust in others does make me wonder about whether that mistrust comes from experience of being stabbed in the back over something very seriously. Is it the fact that others might mis use his gift of caring and power in a manipulative manner and hence he reserves trust to those that need to know or those he feels comfortable with. Like Luna it is his excentricity that I always loved about Albus Dumbledore and his ability to remain calm in situations where most would loose it completely. Dumbledore was the granfather of the books, always handing out the sweets in time of need or information to others who seem to be harbouring over a problem for two long. Two good quotes is that already mentioned below and the one in my signature. "Nitwit! Blubber! Oddment! Tweak!"

I've always loved Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore's (http://www.hp-lexicon.org/wizards/dumbledore.html) character from the very beginning. Dumbledore played such a large and important role throughout the series as both a mentor and a guide for Harry. Ever since the start, the wizened Headmaster of Hogwarts has always been there for Harry. And in HBP we witness his tragic death. Some discussion questions on our favorite Headmaster to get the discussion started:[INDENT]1. What are your general thoughts on Dumbledore as a character through books 1-6? Do you see a difference in his behavior and/or actions between the books?From books 1 to 3 Dumbledore comes across less dominant compaired to his character in books 4 to 6 where Voldemort is gaining more and more power and he appears to become more and more dominant and in some cases forceful with his words and actions.2. What do we know or can we guess of Dumbledore's past? What was his family like - was he married and did he have children? What kind of parentage did he come from? What was his relationship with Aberforth like?Not much really, Dumbledore did not want anyone knowing about his family, such as Aberforth in case of others harming them (others such as Voldemort) or using them to get what they want from him. Dumbledore hid his past in order to protect others and I have a feeling we might find out that perhaps he has more than just Aberforth in terms of family. Perhaps he is an uncle or should I say a great uncle. I would love to know his family connections Gulliver Pokeby who was an expert on magical birds died in 1839 according to Lexicon and Jo did say that Albus was around 150 years old. So his birth date is not exact for 1844.

Perhaps Gulliver Pokeby was a relative of Dumbledores because I keep thinking about his occupation as a magical bird expert and how Fawkes being a phoenix could be classed as a magical birds.

Maybe Dumbledore's mother is on the Lexicon time line.

There is a Dorcas Wellbeloved who lived between 1812 to 1904. That would make her 32 years old at the time Dumbledore was born. With a name like Wellbeloved it would not suprise me if she did turn out to be Dumbledore's mother. Not only that but Dorcas Wellbeloved seems to come across as a woman who cared about the needy as she founded the Society for Distressed Witches. Dorcas died in 1904 during war time and around when Grindlewald was alive and kicking. Her life was not long for a witch in wizarding terms. She lived for 92 years and died when Albus would have been around 60 years old.

Tough call though as to who his past family where or his parents but Dorcas Wellbeloved could have been his mother as the dates add up.

Dumbledore is by far my favorite character of the series, I admire above all his wisdom.

1. What are your general thoughts on Dumbledore as a character through books 1-6? Do you see a difference in his behavior and/or actions between the books?

Even though Dumbledore is a very powerful wizard, loved by his peers and feared by his enemies, he is a tender and loving person. His sole presence commands respect, but not because you fear him, but because you want to hear what he has to say. Harry himself has expressed that it would have been more bearable if Dumbledore had shouted at him (in CoS, when he and Ron flew the Anglia to Hogwarts) than to hear the disappointment in his voice. I feel that throughout the series he has remained pretty much the same, trusting Snape from book one to the end, and preparing Harry for his final encounter with Voldemort. With each book Dumbledore's wisdom has become more evident, from his discovery of 12 uses on dragon's blood and work on alchemy, to his theory on Voldemort's Horcruxes. He also seems to know everything that happens within the castle, perhaps aided by the strange instruments in his office, giving the impression that even though he knows of the wanderings of the students at night, he does not interfere so they learn from their own mistakes.

2. What do we know or can we guess of Dumbledore's past? What was his family like - was he married and did he have children? What kind of parentage did he come from? What was his relationship with Aberforth like?

I've always had the impression that Dumbledore is a pure blood from a prominent family. His parents probably died while he and his brother were young, perhaps even before they were accepted to Hogwarts, making them orphans, just like Harry and Voldemort.
Some of Dumbledore's more remarkable quotes:
"To the well-organized mind, death is but the next great adventure"
"Help will always be given at Hogwarts to those who ask for it"
"I will only truly have left this school when none here are loyal to me"

Also, it's possible he may not have married (or if he did, that his wife died much earlier).

I agree that he could have married, but his wife died, OR that he did not marry because his life was dedicated to his school and his students.

4. How did Dumbledore know James & Lily had been killed so quickly after it happened? How did he know Lily had invoked "ancient magic" with her sacrifice? (He must have known because he instructed Hagrid to bring Harry to Privet Drive). What methods did Dumbledore employ in watching over Harry during his time at the Dursleys?

Again, I think it must have been with the aid of his instruments and/or the help of a portrait within the castle that he knew of the Potters' death and of Lily's sacrifice. His wisdom led him to deduct Lily had sacrificed herself to save her son, and DD knew that only the power of love, an ancient magic which Voldemort despised and underestimated, would keep Harry alive as long as he lived with his mother's sister and call her house home.

7. Will Dumbledore continue to play a role in book 7 despite his death? Will he be able to help Harry from beyond the grave? If so, how?

Oh, yes, Dumbledore's lessons to Harry will play a definite role in Book 7. I'm sure Dumbledore will be able to advice and guide Harry through his portrait and through the Pensieve, and I'm sure even Fawkes will be summoned by Harry's continued loyalty to Dumbledore.

Mugglebeki- I love how you pointed out the part in CoS where Harry could not stand hearing Dumbledore disappointed in him. To me, that is perhaps one of the best child-authority figure relationships you could hope for. The kid will keep out of trouble because he respects you and cares what you think. I have a similar relationship with my father.

Your mention of the silver instruments in Dumbledore's office is also thought-provoking. I've always wondered that that thing he used in OotP was...The thing that made those shadowy snake forms...Perhaps that might help Harry on his quest too....:huh:

Here are my ideas:

Dumbledore thought that there was a chance that he would die before Harry had his final fight with Voldemort, and so he took precautions. I think that he may have perhaps left a list of instructions or helpful hints for Harry to follow upon his death. Perhaps Dumbledore set it up where only Harry would be able to find these insturctions so that they could not be intercepted by Voldemort. This book may also contain the names of helpful people and places that could be of help to him in some way. And perhaps the most important part of these instructions might be, a way to contact Dumbledore even though he has died. Perhaps Dumbledore is one of a few people that know how to make contact with the living.

I also think that Dumbledore has set up secret spells and enchantments to protect Harry that no one else but him knows about. Perhaps even an object of Harry's has an enchantment on it to protect him.

Also, I think that R.A.B. is someone not as obvious as Regalus Black, but someone that had a strong connection to Dumbledore. And, despite the note in the fake Horcrux saying that he is probably dead by the time the fake Horcrux is found, I think that R.A.B. is still alive, and will be a great help to Harry much like Dumbledore was.

Perhaps even an object of Harry's has an enchantment on it to protect him.


Like the invisibility cloak!
Hm...There could be more than one reason why he asked Harry to carry it with him at all times in HBP!

Like the invisibility cloak!
Hm...There could be more than one reason why he asked Harry to carry it with him at all times in HBP!

I heard a very interesting theory about this at the Live LeakyMug in California. Someone said that Dumbledore put a tracker on it. That's how he knows everytime Harry's in trouble and such...

I like that idea...though it also means that Dumbledore most likely put the charm on it when he had it in his posession.
So he could have been tracking Harry throughout the books. :lol:
I wouldn't put it past him. Harry is their last hope. Dumbledore wants him safe.

1. What are your general thoughts on Dumbledore as a character through books 1-6? Do you see a difference in his behavior and/or actions between the books?

Dumbledore plays much more of a role in books 4-6 than he did in the previous three. I don't see a difference in his behaviour, although, to be honest, his treatment of the Dursleys in HBP was a tad surprising (although not unjustified). He acts as Harry's guardian, something that he acknowledges himself. But with his charm upon Harry due to expire on July 31st, 1997, he died with it. He provides a combination of comic relief in dark times, deep, reassuring knowledge to Harry that helps underline the themes of the books, and of course as the mentor and guardian.

2. What do we know or can we guess of Dumbledore's past? What was his family like - was he married and did he have children? What kind of parentage did he come from? What was his relationship with Aberforth like?

I think if Dumbledore had a family, we would have heard of it by now. As JKR says, his intelligence isolates him in many ways. I think it is very likely that Dumbledore came from an ancient wizarding family.

The character of Aberforth puzzles me. He seems even more isolated than Dumbledore. He never speaks to Harry (you'd think he would have when Harry went to the Hog's Head to form the DA). Aberforth is even stranger than Albus himself, it seems, but he acts as a witness to most important events: he witnessed Snape overhearing the prophecy, he witnessed Harry forming the DA, etc. I have no idea what his relationship with Dumbledore is like...Dumbledore mentioned him only once, I believe.

3. What exactly were Dumbledore's dealings with Grindelwald like? Did he actually kill Grindelwald, or just defeat him? Will this be of any future importance in the books?

JKR has confirmed that Grindelwald is dead, so this makes it very likely that Albus killed him. I believe he was the precursor to Voldemort: he had no trace whatsoever of humanity in him, so Dumbledore had to defeat him. It's paralell to Harry and Voldemort.

One thing that puzzles me, though, is why it was Dumbledore that killed Grindelwald. At the time, Dumbledore was Transfiguration teacher at Hogwarts. Is this merely an example of Dumbledore's nobility, or did Grindelwald kill someone close to Dumbledore?

4. How did Dumbledore know James & Lily had been killed so quickly after it happened? How did he know Lily had invoked "ancient magic" with her sacrifice? (He must have known because he instructed Hagrid to bring Harry to Privet Drive). What methods did Dumbledore employ in watching over Harry during his time at the Dursleys?

I think it was more of a guess than anything else - a guess that was confirmed when Harry was attacked by Dementors for the first time. If I recall correctly, even Dumbledore was not entirely sure why Harry survived. I think it's likely that Lily sent a Patronus to Dumbledore from Godric's Hollow while James was fighting Voldemort - this is why she had no time to Apparate with Harry.

5. Loyalty - specifically loyalty to Dumbledore - is a theme that has been emphasized many times throughout the books. We've seen Harry's loyalty to Dumbledore call Fawkes to him in a time of dire need. Harry refers to himself as "Dumbledore's man through and through". Why is loyalty to Dumbledore such an important theme in the books? Will loyalty to Dumbledore play an important role for Harry book 7 as he hunts for the horcruxes and battle's Voldemort?

It is an important theme because it speaks of the nobility of being loyal. Remember, Harry's parents would still be alive, Harry would not be the Boy Who Lived, and Harry would not be on his destiny were it not for the tragic betrayal by Peter Pettigrew. Loyalty to Dumbledore, of course, is why Harry is the one to destroy Voldemort's Horcruxes. Dumbledore was the one who stood by Harry, and risked his reputation without caring, when Voldemort came back. He was the only one who believed that Pettigrew was the Secret Keeper. He was the one who sacrificed his job so that Harry could stay at Hogwarts. He was the one who never punished Harry for any of his highly illegal adventures at school.

6. Throughout the books, Dumbledore seems to always be teaching Harry something, but his lessons are sometimes hidden and subtle. What do you believe are the most important lessons Dumbledore taught Harry? Did Dumbledore adequately prepare Harry for the trials that lie ahead in book 7? Is there anything you think Dumbledore should have told Harry before he died?

Dumbledore could have told Harry why he trusts Snape. After all, he probably knows WHY Snape threw him from his office, he knows that Harry knows that it was Snape who overheard the prophecy, so what is the damage in telling him this?

7. Will Dumbledore continue to play a role in book 7 despite his death? Will he be able to help Harry from beyond the grave? If so, how?

He will be his source of inspiration. I am of the thought frame that states his portrait will play a role.

:Thanks, Ignisia, sorry I took so long to reply, I got stuck up with muggle duty at home, trivial things like cooking for my family and doing the dishes - no wand to use the Scourgify spell:D.

2. What do we know or can we guess of Dumbledore's past? What was his family like - was he married and did he have children? What kind of parentage did he come from? What was his relationship with Aberforth like?

I think Dumbledore could be from a muggle family. I think it would be interesting to find out if that's the case. I think he could have possibly been married,his wife would have most likely passed away of old age considering Dumbledore is 150. I think that Albus and Aberforth were close,they were both in the order so..


3. What exactly were Dumbledore's dealings with Grindelwald like? Did he actually kill Grindelwald, or just defeat him? Will this be of any future importance in the books?

Didn't JKR say this would be important? I wonder if Dumbledore just simply defeated Grindelwald,although he could have killed him even aurors were allowed to use the AK.


4. How did Dumbledore know James & Lily had been killed so quickly after it happened? How did he know Lily had invoked "ancient magic" with her sacrifice? (He must have known because he instructed Hagrid to bring Harry to Privet Drive). What methods did Dumbledore employ in watching over Harry during his time at the Dursleys?

I think that Snape may have possibly been at Godric's Hollow. So that would explain how Dumbledore knew everything so fast.


5. Loyalty - specifically loyalty to Dumbledore - is a theme that has been emphasized many times throughout the books. We've seen Harry's loyalty to Dumbledore call Fawkes to him in a time of dire need. Harry refers to himself as "Dumbledore's man through and through". Why is loyalty to Dumbledore such an important theme in the books? Will loyalty to Dumbledore play an important role for Harry book 7 as he hunts for the horcruxes and battle's Voldemort?

Absolutely. Dumbledore has tried to send a message of unity and making the right choices,I really think he has been a great mentor for Harry and a positive role model. I think the loyalty to Dumbledore is more of being loyal to what is right and I think Harry will try to continue Dumbledore's legacy.


6. Throughout the books, Dumbledore seems to always be teaching Harry something, but his lessons are sometimes hidden and subtle. What do you believe are the most important lessons Dumbledore taught Harry? Did Dumbledore adequately prepare Harry for the trials that lie ahead in book 7? Is there anything you think Dumbledore should have told Harry before he died?

I think the most important lesson or message would be making the choice between what is right and what is easy. That seems to be something that has great importance. I think the main thing Dumbledore should have told Harry would be why he trusted Snape. This may have helped ease tensions between the two.



7. Will Dumbledore continue to play a role in book 7 despite his death? Will he be able to help Harry from beyond the grave? If so, how?

I think Dumbledore's role will be that his teachings and his legacy live on in Harry.

:Thanks, Ignisia, sorry I took so long to reply, I got stuck up with muggle duty at home, trivial things like cooking for my family and doing the dishes - no wand to use the Scourgify spell:D.

Call me crazy, but I like doing dishes by hand anyway. :p But I don't have to clean them all, so maybe I'm not the best person to talk.
Scourgify would be a great time saver though...

About Dumbledore's blood status- I like to think of him as a Half-blood. Best of both worlds. Though I think there are clues pointing toward him being pureblood...none of which I can really remember...:rolleyes: Blah, my mind is going!

My general thoughts on Dumbledore.....

He is a tricky tricky tricky man. He's extremely subtle, tactful, and evasive. He tells people what he thinks they need to know and nothing more. I think he has the best interests of the general welfare at heart and takes a lot upon himself to accomplish it (although not wrongfully). I think he is very perceptive, sees what people are capable of, and pushes them to their limits. He is a master tactician, elegantly diplomatic, wildy eccentric. I think his whimsical humor is something that helps keep him going and not be overcome by the gravity of all the issues he has to deal with.

i've always wondered what was dumbledore like in his early teens?? was he a very naughty and mischievious boy?? or was he very studious?? was he like our typical ron, or like the twins (personality wise)?? did he have a girlfriend??:D (now that would definitely be interesting indeed:p )

Awww...I love Dumbledore. I miss him. On to the questions!

1. What are your general thoughts on Dumbledore as a character through books 1-6? Do you see a difference in his behavior and/or actions between the books?

Well, you have his obvious qualities: He is trusting, kind, gentle, protective, eccentric, funny, wise, grandfatherly, brilliant...

As the books progress, we see an even more genuine picture of Dumbledore. We see his loneliness, his fierceness, his worry, his regrets...

One thing I don't think anyone mentioned is how amazingly MANIPULATIVE Dumbledore is/was. He has been a little ruthless in how, when, and to whom he gives key pieces of information because he had had to be. While he certainly wasn't infallible, I think Dumbledore knew much more about things in general than we the readers are lead to believe. I know for a fact that he loved the people around him; but he also "used" them (for lack of a better term) as well. Dumbledore has been playing a brilliant game of chess with his life and others, in order to save the entire wizarding world. He didn't do this because he wanted to, but he, being in the know, HAD to. I believe this is one of the reasons he felt so lonely. And Dumbldore is not the only one to have this quality...most of the stereotypical mentors have done this: Merlin and the Lady of the Lake, Gandalf, Obi Wan Kenobi, etc. I believe Dumbledore has done all he can to "set up the chessboard" for Harry. All Harry has to do now is let all the information Dumbledore gave him influence how he he plays this last round.

I'll say it again. I love Dumbledore. (and if anyone wants any examples of the statements I made above, I will be more than happy to provide plenty, lol)

Also, I love the fierceness we get to see in Dumbledore in books 4, 5, & 6. He may be wise and gentle, but there's no doubt that he's a warrior when he needs to be. I loved when he told Voldemort (book 5, Ministry battle) that he would not be "satisfied" with merely killing him. Dumbledore literally kicks...well you get the picture. :)

2. What do we know or can we guess of Dumbledore's past? What was his family like - was he married and did he have children? What kind of parentage did he come from? What was his relationship with Aberforth like?

I don't think he was married or had children. JKR has stated that he "has no equal, no partner". Dumbledore was a rare man indeed. Hogwarts, his students, the Order of the Phoenix/defeating Voldemort, Harry, and his own personal research in magic was his life. I think an old quote applies here: "it's lonely at the top."

I can't even really begin to speculate what his relationship with Aberforth was like; I can't wait to find out in book 7.

3. What exactly were Dumbledore's dealings with Grindelwald like? Did he actually kill Grindelwald, or just defeat him? Will this be of any future importance in the books?

Oh yes, I believe Harry will find out that Dumbledore did NOT "kill" Grindelwald, and it will influence/give inspiration to him in how to defeat Voldemort. Dumbledore tells us that killing "is not the only way to destroy a man." I am certianly curious to know what the purple jetted spell was that made a "deep gong like" sound when it bounced off Voldemort's conjured shield.

4. How did Dumbledore know James & Lily had been killed so quickly after it happened? How did he know Lily had invoked "ancient magic" with her sacrifice? (He must have known because he instructed Hagrid to bring Harry to Privet Drive). What methods did Dumbledore employ in watching over Harry during his time at the Dursleys?

Well, this ties in with my answer for the first question. Dumbledore was NOT omnipotent, nor was he omniscient. But he was the closest to those ideals that we will ever see, lol. Dumbledore had a good idea of alot of things that were going on, then and now. The man can become invisible without the help of a cloak, he can sense powerful, yet well hidden invisible magic. I believe most of what he knew about Lily/James/Harry and the night at Godric's Hollow, was a lot of (very) educated guesswork/gut feelings/logical deductions, combined with all the information he DID have. He may have even cased Godric's Hollow himself from time to time, (invisible to prying eyes of course) just to see what could see, so to speak---suspicious activities, strange happenings, etc. Same thing with the Dursleys. It is quite apparent that Dumbledore knew what Harry was in for, and knew how Harry was being treated the entire time. I seriously think one of the reasons he came and picked up Harry in person in HBP, was so he could tell the Dursleys off, lol.

5. Loyalty - specifically loyalty to Dumbledore - is a theme that has been emphasized many times throughout the books. We've seen Harry's loyalty to Dumbledore call Fawkes to him in a time of dire need. Harry refers to himself as "Dumbledore's man through and through". Why is loyalty to Dumbledore such an important theme in the books? Will loyalty to Dumbledore play an important role for Harry book 7 as he hunts for the horcruxes and battle's Voldemort?

I believe so, absolutely---in fact, I think it may have a definite bearing on any decision and/or encounter Harry has with Snape. (Dumbledore trusted Snape till the very end).

Also, I believe Fawkes may still have a role to play. Harry may inherit him in the future, or Fawkes may come to Harry's aid in an unforseen way.

Ultimately, if Harry stays loyal to Dumbledore (and he will) he will have a great role model and mentor to base his current decisions and actions off of. If Harry asks himself (and I mean NO offense, here) "what would Dumbledore do?" he'll be just fine, lol. (Well maybe not "fine" but at least victorious)

6. Throughout the books, Dumbledore seems to always be teaching Harry something, but his lessons are sometimes hidden and subtle. What do you believe are the most important lessons Dumbledore taught Harry? Did Dumbledore adequately prepare Harry for the trials that lie ahead in book 7? Is there anything you think Dumbledore should have told Harry before he died?

Most important lessons (there are SO many!):
To trust, and give second chances
to believe in love,
to be loyal,
to make the "right" decision instead of the "easy" one,
to be fierce and strong in your beliefs, but also admit when you are wrong,
to have a little laughter and whimsy in your life
to keep your own counsel, and when to share it with your best friends
to fight the good fight always

Yes, I believe Dumbledore prepared Harry as well as he could for the trials that lay before him...

But hey, a nice anecdote on how to utilize love to defeat Voldemort, and maybe a tale of how he defeated Grindlewald would have been nice, lol. And that gleam, too. I want to know all about that mysterious gleam in Dumbledore's eyes from book 4.


7. Will Dumbledore continue to play a role in book 7 despite his death? Will he be able to help Harry from beyond the grave? If so, how?

In a limited way, yes to both queries. He will continue to play a role as they learn more about him (JKR said we would know more about Dumbledore in the last book), adn we have his portrait as well. Not to mention, Dumbledore will have never really left if there are still those who remain that are loyal to him ;)

Dumbledore was my favourite character in the entire series. There are two sides to Dumbledore though: the part everyone sees - his trusting, eccentric, funny, wise, grandfatherly, brilliant etc. side as well as his lonely, fierce, etc. side. but as Oceania said Dumbledore was manipulative as well. He has to be the strategist though. He's the wise leader against the evil Dark Lords. I'm sure he feels he can't make a mistake and when he started to care for Harry as a person rather than a pawn against the Dark Lord - that's when his plan started to fall apart, or so he thought. I like your chessboard ideas there definitely true. Dumbledore has given Harry all the information he needs to finish off the game.

Also, I love the fierceness we get to see in Dumbledore in books 4, 5, & 6. He may be wise and gentle, but there's no doubt that he's a warrior when he needs to be. I loved when he told Voldemort (book 5, Ministry battle) that he would not be "satisfied" with merely killing him. Dumbledore literally kicks...well you get the picture.
Mmm definitely agree with you on that one Oceania. I can't wait to see the Dumbledore v. Riddle Ministry battle.

Dumbledore didn't have a family. He's alone in the world because he always remained so aloof. His wisdom and character rises him above others in such a way that it seperates him from normal society. Instead he dedicated his life to knowledge and fighting the 'baddies'. He worked in magical science. He studied and became a teacher dedicating his entire life to learning. Then in his spare time he defeated Grindlewald. Set up a society to kick Voldemort's scrawny toosh and trained Harry so that he could complete the job.
His blood is unimportant and to discuss it with any sort of weight is an insult to Dumbledore's memory. Dumbledore clearly said that blood is not important - it's our choices that define us and who we are but for the record I think that Dumbledore is a pure-blood. I think this because of what he said before he used his blood for the cave-sacrifice. However I have a feeling that Aberforth may not however be pureblood, I think that he is a half-blood and also a half-brother. Ablus doesn't seem to be sure about anything about his brother to the point that he doesn't know if Aberforth knows how to read. Not only is he a half-brother I also think that Albus may be alot older than his brother. I don't really think they are close but do talk to each other occasionally.

He defeated Grindlewald and struggled against Voldemort. Even at the very last moments of his life he tried to maintain a sense of dignity showing the Death Eaters curtesy and how a good wizard should act. Dumbledore is a true inspiration and it is a pity that he had to die the way he did. Dumbledore is not capable of standing idly by while someone is in danger - OotP in the Death Chamber he comes to Harry's aid in the nick of time and I think that Dumbledore's past may be very similar to Harry's. I think he had a score to settle with Grindlewald. I think Grindlewald may have tried to harm Dumbledore's family. He sees Harry in himself and that was the reason he tried to help Harry so many times.

How important is it though? 'Defeat'. Dumbledore 'defeated' Grindlewald. 'the one with the power to defeat the Dark Lord'. I think that it is extremely important. Whatever Dumbledore did to Grindlewald to defeat him will be important to Harry's success - though it won't be the be all and end all.

4. How did Dumbledore know James & Lily had been killed so quickly after it happened? How did he know Lily had invoked "ancient magic" with her sacrifice? (He must have known because he instructed Hagrid to bring Harry to Privet Drive). What methods did Dumbledore employ in watching over Harry during his time at the Dursleys?

He was at Godrics Hollow that night. That's how he got the Cloak. That's how he knew what had happened. He was there - though not through all of it. It pained him I'm sure to see it happen but he could not prevent it becuase it would interfere with the prophecy.

5. ...Harry refers to himself as "Dumbledore's man through and through". Why is loyalty to Dumbledore such an important theme in the books? ...

Dumbledore is the true essence of good, wisdom, truth and all those other Hallmark qualities. To be loyal to Dumbledore is to be loyal to those qualities which are essential for Harry to be the antidote to Voldemort -the one.

6. ...Dumbledore seems to always be teaching Harry something... What do you believe are the most important lessons Dumbledore taught Harry? ...

Horcruxes, the importance of choices over blood lineage, the prophecy and Riddle's past were very important lessons and will be essential to defeating the Dark Lord. He needs to know about Horcruxes to finish Voldemort for good. He needed to understand the prophecy becuase it tells Harry who he really is. Also that quote I use as my signature: 'Nothing is easier than to denounce the evildoer; nothing is more difficult than to understand him.'
That's why learning about Riddle's past is so important - Harry needs to understand who Voldemort is in order to defeat him. As long as their is a mob of rampaging angry blood-supremists then the world is not safe even when Voldemort is gone. The Death Eaters do not really know Voldemort's past Harry does. It's important. Though how it wil be played out I obviously don't know.
Choices is very important lesson. Harry and Voldemort are very alike it is their choices that make them different. Harry could have chosen to sulk or become as angry violent son of a witch like Tom Riddle and blame it on his time in the Dursleys but he didn't he chose to be a good person he chose to try and defeat Voldemort. That seperates Tom and Harry.

7. Will Dumbledore continue to play a role in book 7 despite his death? Will he be able to help Harry from beyond the grave? If so, how?

I don't think that Dumbledore will make another appearance, not even in portrait form. However I think that what DUmbledore has said and done and taught Harry will be extremely important. Horcruxes for one. Even when Malfoy was standing armed over him Dumbledore still told him that he could keep Malfoy in hiding if he asked for it. I think this is important. Harry hated Snape before he killed Dumbledore. Now he will hate him even more. His hatred for Snape and need to finish Voldemort will be great incentives for him to continue. Harry pretty much labelled himself 'Dumbledore's man through and through' . That loyalty will be important. How? I'm not sure but we'll know when the next book comes out.

About Dumbledore's blood status- I like to think of him as a Half-blood. Best of both worlds. Though I think there are clues pointing toward him being pureblood...none of which I can really remember... Blah, my mind is going!

Well, I like to think of him as a pure-blood. That way his acceptance of half-bloods is more influential. I really have no references either way.

I don't think it really matters what his ancestry is. One of the things Dumbledore always represents is judging people based on who they are, not from where they come from. I feel like this might be slightly undermined if we knew his 'blood type'.

Posted by Sarapsys:
I don't think it really matters what his ancestry is. One of the things Dumbledore always represents is judging people based on who they are, not from where they come from. I feel like this might be slightly undermined if we knew his 'blood type'.

I agree. Dumbledore does not share his blood heritage with us for a rather simple reason, I think. Because to him, it doesn't matter. At all. He could be a pureblood, half blood, muggle born, could have come from two squibs---we don't know. We DO know that a wizard or witch's personality, disposition, knowledge and talent have nothing to do with blood heritage---look at Hermione (Muggle born), vs. Crabbe and Goyle (purebloods.) Maybe we will find out who Dumbledore's family (Aberforth and otherwise) in the last book. But I highly doubt his blood status will mean much of anything.

I agree. Dumbledore does not share his blood heritage with us for a rather simple reason, I think. Because to him, it doesn't matter. At all. He could be a pureblood, half blood, muggle born, could have come from two squibs---we don't know. We DO know that a wizard or witch's personality, disposition, knowledge and talent have nothing to do with blood heritage---look at Hermione (Muggle born), vs. Crabbe and Goyle (purebloods.) Maybe we will find out who Dumbledore's family (Aberforth and otherwise) in the last book. But I highly doubt his blood status will mean much of anything.

i bet he's muggleborn! actually, no, i bet he's a pureblood.....from a poweful pureblood family (which is why voldemort is sort of scared of him, because he knows that - then again, wouldn't voldemort be constantly taunting DD about being a muggleborn if he was? or is THATwhy he hates them so much? Or does he even know?)
i don't care though...and who knows if we'll ever find out!

DD is such an amazing charcacter, i really can't imagine the wizarding world without hitm, it's awful...i was rereading the end of HBP last night... :(

I agree. Dumbledore does not share his blood heritage with us for a rather simple reason, I think. Because to him, it doesn't matter. At all. He could be a pureblood, half blood, muggle born, could have come from two squibs---we don't know. We DO know that a wizard or witch's personality, disposition, knowledge and talent have nothing to do with blood heritage---look at Hermione (Muggle born), vs. Crabbe and Goyle (purebloods.) Maybe we will find out who Dumbledore's family (Aberforth and otherwise) in the last book. But I highly doubt his blood status will mean much of anything.I agree. Nontheless I'm quite convinced he's pureblood or at least the Death Eaters believe he is, because they always said he's a muggle-lover or something similar to 'treaten' him, but never called him a halfblood or similar things themselves. It should not be important, but I can't resist to think that it would be better, if he were indeed a pureblood. I'm still caught in this thinking I guess (and fear), but if JK gets us all to think different and open like you, she had done a great piece of work. :tu:

Originally posted by RemusLupinFan
Or (this is a kind of out-there theory that I'm not sure I believe), what if Dumbledore made a mistake earlier in his life (which could have been what Dumbledore relived when he drank the green potion?), and as a result is tolerant of others and is willing to trust them because someone he cared about gave him a second chance? As I said, I don't really think I believe that, but it's interesting to speculate on Dumbledore's past.

Maybe it's because he once DIDN'T give someone a chance and now regrets it. My belief is that Dumbledore, who is well aware of his power to influence people, blames himself for what an absolute catastrophe of a person Tom Riddle turned out to be. I happen to think Dumbledore was totally decent toward him when he was in school, what with giving him a fresh start and not telling the other teachers that he was secretly mean. And maybe Tom was already pure evil at age 11 and there wasn't anything anyone could do, but I doubt it. I'm sure Dumbledore didn't view him as pure evil, and just knowing that surely something could have been done made him feel like he should have been the one to do it.

Maybe he's making up for it later. He trusted Snape limitlessly, and I think he believed it did Snape some good. And look how much faith he showed in Draco having a shred of decency.

Sometimes I wonder if Dumbledore doesn't view Harry as a kind of second chance. He watches over Harry all the time but doesn't intrude on his life. He's clear about it when Harry does something wrong, yet equally clear about the fact that he won't ever abandon him or make him leave school.


On a more cheerful note, picturing Dumbledore as a student is the best. I bet he was just as charming but way sillier, making innocent mischief in class because he was too smart. Was he on the quidditch team? Did he make prefect? Did he have to be chased out of the bushes at some long ago Yule Ball...?:D

1. What are your general thoughts on Dumbledore as a character through books 1-6? Do you see a difference in his behavior and/or actions between the books?

I liked him, he seemed to be a kind, knowledgeable and nice person, even though he did lose some of the control that he had in the situations from the end of book 4 onward.

2. What do we know or can we guess of Dumbledore's past? What was his family like - was he married and did he have children? What kind of parentage did he come from? What was his relationship with Aberforth like?

We know that he's eccentric and so is his brother that they learned spells by practicing them and most likely they were passed down in their family.

3. What exactly were Dumbledore's dealings with Grindelwald like? Did he actually kill Grindelwald, or just defeat him? Will this be of any future importance in the books?

I think that he actually killed him, he told Draco that "killing isn't nearly as easy as the innocent believe..." - HBP, so it sounds like he had to do that before...

4. How did Dumbledore know James & Lily had been killed so quickly after it happened? How did he know Lily had invoked "ancient magic" with her sacrifice? (He must have known because he instructed Hagrid to bring Harry to Privet Drive). What methods did Dumbledore employ in watching over Harry during his time at the Dursleys?

Maybe he was at Godrics Hollow the night that that happened... don't know... but they must have been powerful ones...

5. Loyalty - specifically loyalty to Dumbledore - is a theme that has been emphasized many times throughout the books. We've seen Harry's loyalty to Dumbledore call Fawkes to him in a time of dire need. Harry refers to himself as "Dumbledore's man through and through". Why is loyalty to Dumbledore such an important theme in the books? Will loyalty to Dumbledore play an important role for Harry book 7 as he hunts for the horcruxes and battle's Voldemort?

Loyalty to him is important because if anything happens to him, being loyal to him will keep the memory of him alive. I think so, it will strengthen his resolve in finding and destroying the Horcruxes along with battle against Voldemort.

6. Throughout the books, Dumbledore seems to always be teaching Harry something, but his lessons are sometimes hidden and subtle. What do you believe are the most important lessons Dumbledore taught Harry? Did Dumbledore adequately prepare Harry for the trials that lie ahead in book 7? Is there anything you think Dumbledore should have told Harry before he died?

To stand strong for what you believe in, don't give up when the going gets tough, that don't be afraid of the unknown, stand by your friends, they can be your best resource for knowledge and information.

7. Will Dumbledore continue to play a role in book 7 despite his death? Will he be able to help Harry from beyond the grave? If so, how?

I think that through both the Pensieve, his picture[s] and the Veil [poss.?] that he can help him. Not sure of how though, I will have to wait until Book 7 comes out to see how he can.

Aah, Dumbledore, the wisest of all. He has been my favorite character right after reading the HBP. He's an amazing guy. :)

What are your general thoughts on Dumbledore as a character through books 1-6? Do you see a difference in his behavior and/or actions between the books?

Basically, since in every book, we see more and more of him, in every book, we get to know him more and more, and the different sides of his personality are shown in segments.

In the first three books, we see a side to him that the wizarding world considers - insane. From his very calm attitude, to absolute crazy hobbies and ideas, he's someone that Harry looks up to nevertheless. Even with his strange behavior, he is still looked up to for his wisdom and power.

However, in the fourth book, we hear about his fierceness, the fear that he brings out to many people - Death Eaters in particular. That is a side that Harry had never seen of his Headmaster. He had only seen "The Wise old Guy with the Long White Beard" side. But then we see that side of him shortly after Harry comes out of the graveyard. It was something that even Harry feared. From then on, we know that he still is a calm and laid-back guy, but we also know that he can act fiercely whenever he needs to.

Since Harry had seen this side of Dumbedore in the GoF, it was not nearly as shocking when he had seen Dumbledore fight Voldemort in the Ministry of Magic. He carries both his calm attitude and fierceness in the situation, and most of all, displays his power and magical ability. Although Harry had known that he was powerful, it had never really sunk into him until he had seen the fight.

Also in the OotP, we see a side of him that everyone thought unimaginable - his weaknesses. He told Harry straight out that his weakness is that he loves Harry too much. More importantly, he loves everyone too much, that he is sometimes unable to give them the truth. He was scared for Harry's life after Voldemort had fled the Ministry of Magic. The book mentions that there was fear on his face before Harry was possessed. When he tells Harry of the prophecy, he is sad, and Harry sees a tear on his face. He doesn't want Harry to know the truth, because it is just so horrible.

And finally, we see Dumbledore fully in the HBP. We see Dumbledore regularly in the book, and with each time that we see him, the more we get to know him. However, in each visit, Dumbledore becomes more and more open of his personality toward Harry. Showing him the side that even though he is an amazing guy, he is still human, and can still grow frustrated, however, patient he tries to be (explaining to Harry about his strengths), and he lets himself tell Harry that he is aware of his power and his wisdom. He becomes more and more open about it each lesson.

In the Horcrux scene, the line that truly shows what makes Voldemort different from Dumbledore is this.

I am not worried Harry. I am with you.

Voldemort does not care for others, and does not trust others. This is the line that draws in between the pair, and JKR expresses this right before his death to make us remember him well, and to tell us that there is a strong line between good and evil.

And finally, again, the truth that Dumbledore has his weaknesses did not really sink into Harry until he sees him pleading with Snape. In the book, it says that it was a chilling and something scary to experience, and something that he would not want to experience again.

Loyalty - specifically loyalty to Dumbledore - is a theme that has been emphasized many times throughout the books. We've seen Harry's loyalty to Dumbledore call Fawkes to him in a time of dire need. Harry refers to himself as "Dumbledore's man through and through". Why is loyalty to Dumbledore such an important theme in the books? Will loyalty to Dumbledore play an important role for Harry book 7 as he hunts for the horcruxes and battle's Voldemort?

In the very end fo the HBP, there is a passage that goes like this.

"Such loyalty is admirable, of course," said Scrimgeour, who seemed to be restraining his irritation with difficulty, "but Dumbledore is gone, Harry. He's gone."
"He will only be gone from the school when none here are loyal to him," said Harry, smiling in spite of himself.
"My dear boy...even Dumbledore cannot return from the - "
"I am not saying he can. You wouldn't understand. But I've got nothing to tell you."

To me, this is huge foreshadowing to the theme of loyalty in the seventh book. Probably, the most likely thing is so that Harry can remember to listen to Dumbledore, and do what is right, and not what is easy. However, you never know. :)

My analysis of Dumbledore:
Dumbledore is easily one of my favourite book characters ever! He is interesting, mysterious, clever and funny. I love him for all of these things. But the thing that made me first realise how great this character is, is at the end of PS when Dumbledore tells Harry about the power of Lily's love, I adore this bit afterwards:

Dumbledore now became very interested in a bird out on the window-sill, which gave Harry time to dry his eyes on the sheet.' Page 217, UK version.

I gained so much respect for him the first time I read that part. It's such a sweet, touching moment. So although I love Dumbledore for how strong and great and powerful he is, I love these little moments so much more-Another one being in HBP, The Secret Riddle chapter, when Harry mocks Dumbledore's flamboyant, velvet plum suit and Dumbledore just chuckles. It shows such a lovely side to this character! I also love his kindness, thoughtfulness and his ability to trust people and also how he doesn't judge people. Ah! I just love him so much! He is such a special character!

1.What are your general thoughts on Dumbledore as a character through books 1-6? Do you see a difference in his behaviour and/or actions between the books?
I guess I see the development of this character in terms of his relationship with Harry (which is beautifully written) because in book one Dumbledore is already pretty well developed. In the earlier books, Dumbledore is perhaps distant and I guess he is more of an authority figure/a protector to Harry rather than a friend (to begin with). I love how their relationship grows throughout the series until that point in book 6 when it seems to come full circle, with Harry now the protector and Dumbledore placing all of his faith and trust in Harry. (My favourite moment in the series!)

7. Will Dumbledore continue to play a role in book 7 despite his death? Will he be able to help Harry from beyond the grave? If so, how?
I'm sure Dumbledore will continue to play a role in book 7! (Well I certainly hope so!) There will probably be lots of dark times for Harry in book 7 and in those moments I hope he remembers Dumbledore's twinkling eyes and beautiful, young, generous spirit and feels inspired to carry on! I really, really hope this is the role that Dumbledore will play!

One thing I don't think anyone mentioned is how amazingly MANIPULATIVE Dumbledore is/was. He has been a little ruthless in how, when, and to whom he gives key pieces of information because he had had to be. While he certainly wasn't infallible, I think Dumbledore knew much more about things in general than we the readers are lead to believe. I know for a fact that he loved the people around him; but he also "used" them (for lack of a better term) as well. Dumbledore has been playing a brilliant game of chess with his life and others, in order to save the entire wizarding world. He didn't do this because he wanted to, but he, being in the know, HAD to. I believe this is one of the reasons he felt so lonely. And Dumbldore is not the only one to have this quality...most of the stereotypical mentors have done this: Merlin and the Lady of the Lake, Gandalf, Obi Wan Kenobi, etc. I believe Dumbledore has done all he can to "set up the chessboard" for Harry. All Harry has to do now is let all the information Dumbledore gave him influence how he he plays this last round.
Well, this ties in with my answer for the first question. Dumbledore was NOT omnipotent, nor was he omniscient. But he was the closest to those ideals that we will ever see, lol. Dumbledore had a good idea of alot of things that were going on, then and now. The man can become invisible without the help of a cloak, he can sense powerful, yet well hidden invisible magic. I believe most of what he knew about Lily/James/Harry and the night at Godric's Hollow, was a lot of (very) educated guesswork/gut feelings/logical deductions, combined with all the information he DID have. He may have even cased Godric's Hollow himself from time to time, (invisible to prying eyes of course) just to see what could see, so to speak---suspicious activities, strange happenings, etc. Same thing with the Dursleys. It is quite apparent that Dumbledore knew what Harry was in for, and knew how Harry was being treated the entire time.
:wow: I was going to say something similar but you put it so well...:tu: Dumbledore is a master chess player in that he makes a move not for immediate result, but to set up the board for the killer blow to the opponent. This is what I believe he has been doing through out the books. But this means taking risks that he must accept, albeit minimize as much as possible.

Here are several examples of what I am talking about.
1)He agreed to host the Tri-Wizard tournament.
2)He made Draco a prefect.
3)He allowed Umbridge to be assigned as the DADA teacher.
4)He slipped the idea of the Room of Requirement to Harry during the Yule Ball.
5)He led Lucius into a trap to go after the Prophecy for Voldemort, when it would have been so easy for Dumbledore to have Harry remove the prophecy and destroy it.
6)He allowed Draco to remain at school knowing Draco was the reason for the attacks.

I could go on, but I see all these as chess moves by Dumbledore towards a primary goal. To get the Adults from the 4 houses to unite creating an army more formidable than any Voldemort could hope to assemble. I know it seems far fetched now, but I think once book 7 is released everyone will finally appreciate what Dumbledore was actually doing after Voldemort return. He was not simply reacting to the moves of Voldemort but actually leading Voldemort into making the moves Dumbledore wanted him to make.

Just as Ron did with the Chess board in PS/SS, Dumbledore has set the board up for Harry to succeed. But in order to defeat Voldemort he had to sacrifice himself. Now it is only up to Harry to make the correct move(s) to defeat Voldemort.

Dumbledore is a master chess player in that he makes a move not for immediate result, but to set up the board for the killer blow to the opponent. This is what I believe he has been doing through out the books. But this means taking risks that he must accept, albeit minimize as much as possible.

OMG, you are brilliant. Even if things don't turn out as you say, this is a brilliant idea and a logical development of the events. I don't play chess, but I understand it is a game of strategy, and this is precisely what you are describing:tu:

4)He slipped the idea of the Room of Requirement to Harry during the Yule Ball.

I thought Dobby slipped the idea of the RoR to Harry during his 5th. year, when Umbridge was becoming more and more unbearable. When DD mentioned the RoR in the Yule Ball, Harry thought nothing of it. Dobby's mention of the RoR to Harry made me go back to the GoF book and read the reference DD made of that bathroom, which fit Dobby's description of the RoR. Of course, it could have been Dumbledore himself who gave Dobby the idea of slipping that information to Harry:huh:

I thought Dobby slipped the idea of the RoR to Harry during his 5th. year, when Umbridge was becoming more and more unbearable. When DD mentioned the RoR in the Yule Ball, Harry thought nothing of it. Dobby's mention of the RoR to Harry made me go back to the GoF book and read the reference DD made of that bathroom, which fit Dobby's description of the RoR. Of course, it could have been Dumbledore himself who gave Dobby the idea of slipping that information to Harry
If you recall it wasn't until Harry mentioned to Hermione that Dumbledore knows about the room of requirement and mentioned it that Hermione accepts the RoR as a viable option.

Here is my thought on it.
Dumbledore tried to get the Wizarding community to unite by using the Tri-Wizard tournament. But that failed because Harry's name entered the goblet and just caused more friction then actually bringing the school together behind a common Champion. So Dumbledore had to resort to a clever plan that Voldemort couldn't find out about and ruin. By manipulating the situation Voldemort would make the decisions Dumbledore wanted Voldemort to make. And Dumbledore would surreptitiously make it so everyone knew Harry was the chosen one and would want to join him in fighting Voldemort.

So the tournament plan failed and Dumbledore knows that Voldemort is trying to regenerate a body. He fully expects Fudge to deny Voldemort's return and work against Dumbledore's efforts to warn the community and try to get them united. So he makes it so that the students will look to Harry to teach them DADA based on his talent for the subject. So he forces Fudge to assign a DADA teacher and make it appear as the ministry is manipulating the students educations. Dumbledore knows that Harry will need a secret location for the classes so he mentions the RoR during the Yule Ball in the hope that it will spark Harry's curiousity and Harry will discover the room. Only Harry has other things on his mind at the time and completely forgets about it. So I wouldn't be surprised that when Dumbledore knew about the first meeting in Hogs Head that he probably mentioned to Dobby to visit Harry.

But I tend to think Dobby was acting completely on his own without any nudges from Dumbledore. Dumbledore probably knew that Dobby was the only elf cleaning Gryffindor's tower with all the hats. I suspect that the main reason Dumbledore hired Dobby was because he could assist Harry out with secrets of the castle.

Dumbledore was thinking about move 8 during move 2. He mentioned the RoR in the hope that Harry would use it to teach the other students if the need arose to make the Ministry appear as they are trying to interfere at Hogwarts. If Fudge had surprised Dumbledore and accepted Voldemort's return then there wouldn't be this need. Since Fudge didn't, Dumbledore played his hand and didn't find a new DADA teacher making Fudge assign one of his own.

I could go on for pages about all the little tricks of strategy I think Dumbledore is using. I will stop here for now.:)

If you recall it wasn't until Harry mentioned to Hermione that Dumbledore knows about the room of requirement and mentioned it that Hermione accepts the RoR as a viable option.

True, but Harry only remembered the room after Dobby mentioned it. I got the impression that it was Dobby's description of the room, and how it conforms to your needs that, that Harry realized that Dumbledore was really referring to the RoR in the Yule Ball. Yet, I agree that Dumbledore was behind the idea of using the RoR for the DA's meetings, as you so brilliantly mention.
Fuelpagan I love your theory of Dumbledore's strategic moves to make Voldemort move the way DD wants. At least this is about the only theory I've read that really makes sense out of Dumbledore's death. Many have mentioned that DD sacrificed himself, or that he had agreed with Snape in advance that, should it be necessary, he should kill him. Maybe one or more of those theories turn out to be the correct one, but yours seems more plausible to me because it explains without any holes the purpose of Dumbledore's death (and at the same time it could give Snape the "redemption" I am so hoping for, as LV would still see Snape on his side because he killed DD).
Anyway, about the uniting of the wizarding community, the Sorting Hat urged the students to stand united through the difficult times ahead (because of Voldemort's return). A thread in the Divination forum discusses whether Hogwarts will open in Book 7, and some posters (including me) have mentioned that the returning students should follow the advice of the Sorting Hat, and forget about Houses, House Cup and House Championship, and unite in one common cause against Voldemort.

if only i could write in italian!!!!!! i've found only now this thread,otherwise i would have replayed time ago!
now it's very late and i've read only the first post,but i will try to read everything as soon as possible.
by now i just say that Dumbledore is my favourite character in absolute, i love him! he's one of the wiser 'persons' i've ever met,and for each book i've found out all his teachings and his sentences more significaative and i've re-written them in a copybook..they're so usefull for me!

Hi, Valentina! :D

You could always check out this thread: http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=95976

But I can still understand you, so you can take a stab at posting now, if you'd like.

thank you
my english is not perfect,but i can be understood ;) better speaking than writing
the problem is that i often can't say and communicate everything i'd want to in english, so it takes time,and now it's time to go to bad :)
but i will post in this thread!

Buona sera, Valentina:welcome: I'm sorry, I don't speak Italian, Spanish is my native language, but you make yourself well understood. Dumbledore is also my favorite character. Hope you enjoy the forums.

Maybe one or more of those theories turn out to be the correct one, but yours seems more plausible to me because it explains without any holes the purpose of Dumbledore's death (and at the same time it could give Snape the "redemption" I am so hoping for, as LV would still see Snape on his side because he killed DD).
For a full account of what I think happened on the tower you should read my DIDETPD hypothesis. (link is in my signature) It gives a detail account of what I think Dumbledore and Snape's plan to fool Voldemort was. But I don't see a Snape "redemption" because I don't think Snape killed Dumbledore on the tower, but I do think Snape did kill him.
Anyway, about the uniting of the wizarding community, the Sorting Hat urged the students to stand united through the difficult times ahead (because of Voldemort's return). A thread in the Divination forum discusses whether Hogwarts will open in Book 7, and some posters (including me) have mentioned that the returning students should follow the advice of the Sorting Hat, and forget about Houses, House Cup and House Championship, and unite in one common cause against Voldemort.
I have posted similar ideas on the thread as well. :)

For a full account of what I think happened on the tower you should read my DIDETPD hypothesis. (link is in my signature) It gives a detail account of what I think Dumbledore and Snape's plan to fool Voldemort was. But I don't see a Snape "redemption" because I don't think Snape killed Dumbledore on the tower, but I do think Snape did kill him.

I've just finished reading your theory - very interesting, indeed, and I'd love to discuss some points, but I'm afraid this is not the right forum, so where can we discuss?

What are your general thoughts on Dumbledore as a character through books 1-6? Do you see a difference in his behavior and/or actions between the books? Dumbledore is one of my favorite characters. He's kind, wonderfully eccentric, funny, intelligent and even though he's the greatest wizard who ever lived he recognizes that doesn't make him infallible.

Loyalty - specifically loyalty to Dumbledore - is a theme that has been emphasized many times throughout the books. We've seen Harry's loyalty to Dumbledore call Fawkes to him in a time of dire need. Harry refers to himself as "Dumbledore's man through and through". Why is loyalty to Dumbledore such an important theme in the books? Will loyalty to Dumbledore play an important role for Harry book 7 as he hunts for the horcruxes and battle's Voldemort? I think it's important because loyalty to Dumbledore can be seen as being allied with the good side. I think a number of people are loyal to Dumbledore because he has repeatedly gone out on a limb to be loyal to them: Providing second chances, looking past presumably unforgivable mistakes and putting his own career and life on the line to preserve the safety of others. Loyalty to Dumbledore and his way of thinking will be very important in book 7.

Will Dumbledore continue to play a role in book 7 despite his death? Will he be able to help Harry from beyond the grave? If so, how? I believe he will find a way to help Harry in book 7. JKR has said that Harry has all the tools he needs in order to complete the task, he just has to figure out how all the pieces fit together. I think something Dumbledore has taught him, or possibly something the headmaster has left behind for Harry will be key to figuring out the mystery of the horcruxes as well as the key to defeating Voldemort in the end.

I've just finished reading your theory - very interesting, indeed, and I'd love to discuss some points, but I'm afraid this is not the right forum, so where can we discuss?
Just post your questions in the DIDETPD thread. I will see them.:)

I didn’t get to answer my questions yet. :)

1. What are your general thoughts on Dumbledore as a character through books 1-6? Do you see a difference in his behavior and/or actions between the books?
Dumbledore is to me the wisest character in the series. After living for roughly 150 years, he’s bound to be very knowledgeable. But more than that, he is full of understanding and intuition. He’s been described as the kindly grandfather-mentor figure of the story. He’s also very mysterious – we don’t quite know what the exactly what extent of his powers was, but we know that he is very powerful. But despite his seeming omnipotence, he is a flawed human being. In regards to his behavior, I thought he was a bit different in HBP – less laid-back and more down-to-business. But I suppose it was not really unexpected, given the serious nature of the circumstances - with Voldemort back to full power and his own strength waning, Dumbledore had to make sure the fight would be able to continue after his death in a strong enough way.

2. What do we know or can we guess of Dumbledore's past? What was his family like - was he married and did he have children? What kind of parentage did he come from? What was his relationship with Aberforth like?
Dumbledore’s past is an interesting thing to speculate about. I imagine Dumbledore to be pureblood, but not because he’s so good at magic, but instead because it would be all the more telling of his tolerant and accepting nature. The fact that he has been labeled a “muggle-lover” is more significant if he came from a pureblood family. As for his marital status, it’s hard to say whether he could have been married at one point or another. Regarding his relationship with Aberforth, I imagine they probably got along ok. I’d wager that Dumbledore was the only one who really understood his brother since everyone else remarks how odd he is.

3. What exactly were Dumbledore's dealings with Grindelwald like? Did he actually kill Grindelwald, or just defeat him? Will this be of any future importance in the books?
I believe Dumbledore did actually kill Grindelwald, but in battle so it really wasn’t murder. I do believe this could have significance in book 7, but I’m not exactly sure how.

4. How did Dumbledore know James & Lily had been killed so quickly after it happened? How did he know Lily had invoked "ancient magic" with her sacrifice? (He must have known because he instructed Hagrid to bring Harry to Privet Drive). What methods did Dumbledore employ in watching over Harry during his time at the Dursleys?
I think he had many ways of keeping watch over what was going on at their house in Godric’s Hollow. There could have been a portrait inside, or maybe some of those little silver instruments on Dumbledore’s desk helped in some way. Dumbledore may have known about the ancient magic Lily evoked because I feel that Dumbledore is wise enough to be able to deduce it from looking at the outcome of what happened. I imagine he is very well-versed in that sort of ancient magic and thus would be able to accurately piece together what might have happened. Regarding Dumbledore’s methods of watching over Harry while at the Dursleys, Mrs. Figg must have played a pivotal role in keeping Dumbledore updated on Harry’s condition. He may have sent people under invisibility cloaks to keep watch as well. I also wonder if the Dursleys’ home has a magical portrait without their knowing it.

5. Loyalty - specifically loyalty to Dumbledore - is a theme that has been emphasized many times throughout the books. We've seen Harry's loyalty to Dumbledore call Fawkes to him in a time of dire need. Harry refers to himself as "Dumbledore's man through and through". Why is loyalty to Dumbledore such an important theme in the books? Will loyalty to Dumbledore play an important role for Harry book 7 as he hunts for the horcruxes and battle's Voldemort?
Loyalty to Dumbledore is important because of what Dumbledore represents. To me, he is the ultimate good, even though he is a flawed human being who messes up sometimes. Dumbledore is the head of the “good side”, so loyalty to him means that you pledge yourself to what he stands for. I believe loyalty to Dumbledore will indeed play a very important role in both Harry’s search for the Horcruxes and in the battle against Voldemort. For one thing, it will help Harry to remember and follow the lessons that Dumbledore taught him during his life, no matter how hard they seem. For another, it may call Fawkes to Harry again at a moment when he is in dire need. We have already seen how Harry’s loyalty to Dumbledore can save his life (when he called Fawkes to him in CoS), so it’s not hard to imagine that it could happen again.

6. Throughout the books, Dumbledore seems to always be teaching Harry something, but his lessons are sometimes hidden and subtle. What do you believe are the most important lessons Dumbledore taught Harry? Did Dumbledore adequately prepare Harry for the trials that lie ahead in book 7? Is there anything you think Dumbledore should have told Harry before he died?
The most important lessons that Dumbledore has taught Harry are in my opinion:
Choices are far more important that one’s abilities
Harry will have to choose what’s right over what’s easy
Harry’s power to love is both very strong and very importantThere may be others, but these are the ones that come to mind right away.

7. Will Dumbledore continue to play a role in book 7 despite his death? Will he be able to help Harry from beyond the grave? If so, how?
I believe Dumbledore will indeed play an important role in book 7 even though he is dead. I believe Harry’s memories of him and his lessons will help Harry a great deal by giving Harry moral support and since Dumbledore’s lessons were all very valuable.

Even though Dumbledore is a very powerful wizard, loved by his peers and feared by his enemies, he is a tender and loving person. His sole presence commands respect, but not because you fear him, but because you want to hear what he has to say. Harry himself has expressed that it would have been more bearable if Dumbledore had shouted at him (in CoS, when he and Ron flew the Anglia to Hogwarts) than to hear the disappointment in his voice.:tu: So true! And re the disappointment in Dumbledore’s voice being worse than shouting is similar to when in PoA, Harry felt far worse that Lupin was disappointed in him for not turning the Marauders’ Map in than when Snape was yelling at him moments before.

3. What exactly were Dumbledore's dealings with Grindelwald like? Did he actually kill Grindelwald, or just defeat him? Will this be of any future importance in the books?
I believe Dumbledore did actually kill Grindelwald, but in battle so it really wasn’t murder. I do believe this could have significance in book 7, but I’m not exactly sure how.

I agree that Dumbledore killed Grindelwald. But I also think that it was murder if he took a life. It also would explain more if Dumbledore killed Grindelwald. He could be trying to tell Harry that "love is the power that will win, and don't use Unforgivables, because I did, and I don't want you to make the mistake I did."

5. Loyalty - specifically loyalty to Dumbledore - is a theme that has been emphasized many times throughout the books. We've seen Harry's loyalty to Dumbledore call Fawkes to him in a time of dire need. Harry refers to himself as "Dumbledore's man through and through". Why is loyalty to Dumbledore such an important theme in the books? Will loyalty to Dumbledore play an important role for Harry book 7 as he hunts for the horcruxes and battle's Voldemort?
Loyalty to Dumbledore is important because of what Dumbledore represents. To me, he is the ultimate good, even though he is a flawed human being who messes up sometimes. Dumbledore is the head of the “good side”, so loyalty to him means that you pledge yourself to what he stands for. I believe loyalty to Dumbledore will indeed play a very important role in both Harry’s search for the Horcruxes and in the battle against Voldemort. For one thing, it will help Harry to remember and follow the lessons that Dumbledore taught him during his life, no matter how hard they seem. For another, it may call Fawkes to Harry again at a moment when he is in dire need. We have already seen how Harry’s loyalty to Dumbledore can save his life (when he called Fawkes to him in CoS), so it’s not hard to imagine that it could happen again.

You answer made me consider something. Dumbledore is almost like our conscience. It knows what is truly right and wrong, and if we follow it, we feel like we're doing the right thing. But if we don't, we feel bad about it.
...It's a work-in-progress idea. :lol:


:tu: So true! And re the disappointment in Dumbledore’s voice being worse than shouting is similar to when in PoA, Harry felt far worse that Lupin was disappointed in him for not turning the Marauders’ Map in than when Snape was yelling at him moments before.

It's really a true mark of the love and respect Harry feels for Lupin and Dumbledore. It's also a good way to tell what sort of things Harry responds positively to.

I agree that Dumbledore killed Grindelwald. But I also think that it was murder if he took a life. It also would explain more if Dumbledore killed Grindelwald. He could be trying to tell Harry that "love is the power that will win, and don't use Unforgivables, because I did, and I don't want you to make the mistake I did."You're right, it is still murder in a sense. But when you're in a battle situation, it's a little different than straighforward murder. It's possible that Dumbledore could have been less than noble in his past, but I rather don't think he ever used the Unforgivable Curses in any point in his life - he seems too much against the Dark Arts for that. There may still be a lesson or a mistake Dumbledore made here, but I don't believe he'd ever have used the Unforgivables.

I’m jumping in a bit late here.

1. What are your general thoughts on Dumbledore as a character through books 1-6? Do you see a difference in his behavior and/or actions between the books?


I do see certain difference, but I think that’s not because he actually changes, but because Harry perceives certain difference as he gets more involved with Dumbledore personally and grows up possibly better understanding some things that are going on.

2. What do we know or can we guess of Dumbledore's past? What was his family like - was he married and did he have children? What kind of parentage did he come from? What was his relationship with Aberforth like?

I find it difficult to imagine Dumbledore married – he is so detached – but on the other hand, everything would be possible with him. There is a great veil of mystery hanging on Dumbledore, not unlike Snape, only that he appears sympathetic in Harry’s eyes. As for his family background, I like to think he had somewhat extravagant parents, perhaps artists, but again anything is possible.

3. What exactly were Dumbledore's dealings with Grindelwald like? Did he actually kill Grindelwald, or just defeat him? Will this be of any future importance in the books?


I’m currently rereading the books and have noticed that almost every single insignificant-looking detail that has been mentioned early on has became important later in the series, so there must be something into Grindelwald.

4. What methods did Dumbledore employ in watching over Harry during his time at the Dursleys?


(I skipped the first parts as I have no particular ideas about them.) I’m very amused by the thought that there would have been a magical portrait in Dursleys’ ah, so normal living room :D Or perhaps the famous creaky stair? (cf. Petunia and the Creaky Stair (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=48912&highlight=stair))

What are your general thoughts on Dumbledore as a character through books 1-6?

He is a teacher, imparting wisdom so simple yet so profoundly important it can only be learned one way: by experience.

What exactly were Dumbledore's dealings with Grindelwald like? Did he actually kill Grindelwald, or just defeat him? Will this be of any future importance in the books?

I suspect it will suffice that we know he defeated him.

Loyalty - specifically loyalty to Dumbledore - is a theme that has been emphasized many times throughout the books. We've seen Harry's loyalty to Dumbledore call Fawkes to him in a time of dire need. Harry refers to himself as "Dumbledore's man through and through". Why is loyalty to Dumbledore such an important theme in the books? Will loyalty to Dumbledore play an important role for Harry book 7 as he hunts for the horcruxes and battle's Voldemort?

Loyalty to Dumbledore, the man, is immaterial now that he is dead. It was merely a step to internalizing his teachings and the principles he stood for; which will be crucial.

Did Dumbledore adequately prepare Harry for the trials that lie ahead in book 7?

Yes.

Is there anything you think Dumbledore should have told Harry before he died?

No.

Will Dumbledore continue to play a role in book 7 despite his death?

Oh yes.

Will he be able to help Harry from beyond the grave? If so, how?

Harry knows far more than he realizes. ;)

I think we should discuss, if it hasn't been already, how Dumbledore seems trusting almost to the point of recklessness. Obviously, we know he was right to trust Lupin to be a teacher and Hagrid to be gamekeeper (I believe he was right to trust Snape to be an Order spy too...but that's for the Triumverate to discuss).

But Dumbledore seems to overlook many obvious things when it comes to trusting people. We are shown in the very first chapter that Dumbledore trusts Hagrid with his life. This is a powerful introduction for Hagrid, especially considering he is late in bringing Harry to the Dursleys. At first one would think, and McGonagoll indeed asks, why would you trust someone so who is late completing a crucial task? It's very, very obvious throughout the series that Hagrid and Dumbledore are very close friends. Dumbledore trusts him to teach Care of Magical Creatures, even though in his two years we saw him teach he:


Saw a student get assaulted by a Hippogriff on the first day of class. Yes, this wasn't Hagrid's fault, but...
Illegally bred a highly dangerous and certainly not curriculum approved creature (Blast ended skrewts)
Doesn't seem to know the difference between dangerous and safe


Etc. It's obvious to everyone, even HRH deep down, that Hagrid is not a very effective teacher. It seems Dumbledore doesn't care about this; all he cares about is that Hagrid is passionate about his job, which he is.

And with Snape...well....where to start? Although he is passionate about Potions and DADA to a poetic degree, his treatment of students is rather inexcusable. He would be a great teacher if he wasn't so mean. Dumbledore never objected to his intolerance for incompetence and stupidity.

Illegally bred a highly dangerous and certainly not curriculum approved creature (Blast ended skrewts)
Doesn't seem to know the difference between dangerous and safe


I wonder if these are not understandable expressions of very admirable qualities...?

It's obvious to everyone, even HRH deep down, that Hagrid is not a very effective teacher. It seems Dumbledore doesn't care about this

And with Snape...well....where to start? Although he is passionate about Potions and DADA to a poetic degree, his treatment of students is rather inexcusable. He would be a great teacher if he wasn't so mean. Dumbledore never objected to his intolerance for incompetence and stupidity.

Why does Professor Dumbledore allow Professor Snape to be so nasty to the students (especially to Harry, Hermione, and Neville)?

JKR: "Dumbledore believes there are all sorts of lessons in life ... horrible teachers like Snape are one of them!"

I think we should discuss, if it hasn't been already, how Dumbledore seems trusting almost to the point of recklessness. Obviously, we know he was right to trust Lupin to be a teacher and Hagrid to be gamekeeper (I believe he was right to trust Snape to be an Order spy too...but that's for the Triumverate to discuss).

But Dumbledore seems to overlook many obvious things when it comes to trusting people.
I see Dumbledore’s trust as a choice that demonstrates his values and attitude. It is not that he would be naïve; I reckon he knows very well that there is a risk that his trust be betrayed. In some cases the risk is rather small, in some other cases very big, but nevertheless Dumbledore doesn’t want to distrust people unless there is a direct reason to that.

He also doesn’t take the trust issue personally. If we think about Harry’s procrastination in getting the memory from Slughorn, Dumbledore’s reaction seems clearly that of disappointment, but he does not seem personally offended.

Besides, while he trusts people, it seems that his plans are never completely ruined if the trust is betrayed, as he always has an alternative course of action to take. This emphasises the trust as his attitude towards people and life, not as his modus operandi. In the end, his example shows that by trusting people one have lot to gain but little to loose.

Albus Dumbledore is my favourite character, and I'm a bit ashamed that the Snape threads have rolled over into multiple versions while Albus remains on his third page :( I love the natural way that Dumbledore inserts an element of teaching into everything he says and does. He loves to teach, and takes great satisfaction in seeing his students do well.


But Dumbledore seems to overlook many obvious things when it comes to trusting people. We are shown in the very first chapter that Dumbledore trusts Hagrid with his life. This is a powerful introduction for Hagrid, especially considering he is late in bringing Harry to the Dursleys. At first one would think, and McGonagoll indeed asks, why would you trust someone so who is late completing a crucial task? It's very, very obvious throughout the series that Hagrid and Dumbledore are very close friends.
I see one of the reasons that Dumbledore trusts so deeply is because most of his friendships have been in existance for a long time, and I mean for years and years. The friendship between Dumbledore and Hagrid, McGonagall or Slughorn is very old, and they have each lived and worked alongside each other. Their friendship has lasted through at least one war. Dumbledore's friends are not people he met a month ago, or even a year ago. These are tried and tested lifetime friendships which run deep. If a friend you've known for a few weeks turned up late one day, you would question their friendship. But when someone you've known and trusted, even loved for many years doesn't arrive on time, you know there must be a good reason. You don't question their motives.


(Hagrid) Doesn't seem to know the difference between dangerous and safe
Perhaps, except the creatures are safe enough for Hagrid. He seems to have no problem with them. I think it's more that Hagrid has trouble remembering that not everyone can handle a dragon or skrewt :)

I'm a bit ashamed that the Snape threads have rolled over into multiple versions while Albus remains on his third page

I don't think Dumbledore would mind. He would probably find it quite understandable. :)

I love the natural way that Dumbledore inserts an element of teaching into everything he says and does.

It's really remarkable.

Perhaps, except the creatures are safe enough for Hagrid. He seems to have no problem with them. I think it's more that Hagrid has trouble remembering that not everyone can handle a dragon or skrewt :)

Yes, and I suspect there's a reason a benevolent Headmaster might want young witches and wizards accustomed to dealing with danger. :D

Originally posted by RemusLupinFan
6. Throughout the books, Dumbledore seems to always be teaching Harry something, but his lessons are sometimes hidden and subtle. What do you believe are the most important lessons Dumbledore taught Harry? Did Dumbledore adequately prepare Harry for the trials that lie ahead in book 7? Is there anything you think Dumbledore should have told Harry before he died?

Probably discussed already if so please dont mind it(A).
Will this change? As far as I know every headmaster is in Dumbledore's office.
So Dumbledore is probably going to be there pretty soon. It could've something to do with the mechanics of this 'charm' to prevent Dumbledore to get into the painting. But if not then he can probably tell Harry everything he wanted. Jo probably finds/makes a way to prevent this or else his death wasn't that bad afterall(ofcoure it is but far less).

I don't think Dumbledore would mind. He would probably find it quite understandable. :)
:)


Yes, and I suspect there's a reason a benevolent Headmaster might want young witches and wizards accustomed to dealing with danger. :D
Indeed :lol: It's all part of his desire to see the kids taught properly and in the things they really need to know. It must have really hurt Dumbledore to watch the damage the Ministry caused Hogwarts during OotP, and also to have stood back and trusted Snape to teach Harry Occlumency. I can only imagine how those lessons might have gone had Dumbledore been Harry's instructor :) Before HBP was published I'd hoped that Dumbledore would be teaching Harry Occlumency, but I think it became clear that Harry wouldn't have accepted any more Occlumency tuition. I'm certain that Dumbledore realised that.

Probably discussed already if so please dont mind it(A).
Will this change? As far as I know every headmaster is in Dumbledore's office.
So Dumbledore is probably going to be there pretty soon. It could've something to do with the mechanics of this 'charm' to prevent Dumbledore to get into the painting. But if not then he can probably tell Harry everything he wanted. Jo probably finds/makes a way to prevent this or else his death wasn't that bad afterall(ofcoure it is but far less).

From what I recall, Dumbledore's portrait is already snug-as-a-bug in what is now McGonagall's office. :cool:

I think we should discuss, if it hasn't been already, how Dumbledore seems trusting almost to the point of recklessness. Obviously, we know he was right to trust Lupin to be a teacher and Hagrid to be gamekeeper (I believe he was right to trust Snape to be an Order spy too...but that's for the Triumverate to discuss).
I don't believe his absolute trust in people is because he's reckless, I think it's because Dumbledore is a true intellectual. He feels everyone has to make sacrifices for the greater good because reasonably, given what they're up against that's what they have to do to stop Voldemort. Grudges should be put aside and orders should be followed even if someone doesn't agree with them. He's compelled to do the smart thing, which is in his mindset the right thing.

Quote from RemusLupinFan:
5. Loyalty - specifically loyalty to Dumbledore - is a theme that has been emphasized many times throughout the books. We've seen Harry's loyalty to Dumbledore call Fawkes to him in a time of dire need. Harry refers to himself as "Dumbledore's man through and through". Why is loyalty to Dumbledore such an important theme in the books? Will loyalty to Dumbledore play an important role for Harry book 7 as he hunts for the horcruxes and battle's Voldemort?

Loyalty to Dumbledore is one of the most troubling aspects of the book in my opinion because it implies that you should be loyal to a man rather then the ideal/mortality that said man stands for. Yet at the same time I totally understand why Dumbledore is so keen on loyalty in the Order and from Harry. I guess it's sort of a paradox...as much as I liked Harry saying he was Dumbledore's man I rather that Harry be Harry's man.

Quote from RemusLupinFan:
6. Throughout the books, Dumbledore seems to always be teaching Harry something, but his lessons are sometimes hidden and subtle. What do you believe are the most important lessons Dumbledore taught Harry? Did Dumbledore adequately prepare Harry for the trials that lie ahead in book 7? Is there anything you think Dumbledore should have told Harry before he died?

I think that overall Dumbledore has gone an excellent job preparing Harry for the path ahead. My one area of concern is that Dumbledore didn't call Harry to the carpet for his dallying into the Dark Arts.

Quote from RemusLupinFan:
7. Will Dumbledore continue to play a role in book 7 despite his death? Will he be able to help Harry from beyond the grave? If so, how?

Dumbledore towers over the story especially after HBP and I think that he'll continue to play a part. However I don't think that he'll be able to reach beyond the grave...anything that happens after his death must have been set up before hand. Even Dumbledore has to move on and part of that is letting other people...Harry, Snape, Lupin, etc...take up the reins of leadership.

Loyalty to Dumbledore is one of the most troubling aspects of the book in my opinion because it implies that you should be loyal to a man rather then the ideal/mortality that said man stands for. Yet at the same time I totally understand why Dumbledore is so keen on loyalty in the Order and from Harry. I guess it's sort of a paradox...as much as I liked Harry saying he was Dumbledore's man I rather that Harry be Harry's man.

I don't remember Dumbledore himself ever being keen on loyalty. I think he'd absolutely agree with everything else you said. :)

My one area of concern is that Dumbledore didn't call Harry to the carpet for his dallying into the Dark Arts.

I suppose if he'd done it on purpose, it would have been cause for concern ...

Even Dumbledore has to move on and part of that is letting other people...Harry, Snape, Lupin, etc...take up the reins of leadership.

Almost like phoenixes rising from the ashes. :D

Loyalty to Dumbledore is one of the most troubling aspects of the book in my opinion because it implies that you should be loyal to a man rather then the ideal/mortality that said man stands for.

That's something I hadn't thought of. And it's pretty interesting. While it's possible that Dumbledore might symbolise the things he stands for, that hardly makes up for the fact that he is still, in the Potterverse, a human being. While loyalty to those who do good to you is wonderful, Dumbledore seems to have been diefied in Harry's eyes. I don't really know what to make of this...

Loyalty to Dumbledore is one of the most troubling aspects of the book in my opinion because it implies that you should be loyal to a man rather then the ideal/mortality that said man stands for. Yet at the same time I totally understand why Dumbledore is so keen on loyalty in the Order and from Harry. I guess it's sort of a paradox...as much as I liked Harry saying he was Dumbledore's man I rather that Harry be Harry's man.

Finally somebody else who has a problem with this! However, like capella_black (http://www.cosforums.com/member.php?u=129232), I also think that it is not Dumbledore himself who is asking for a behaviour that is approaching personal worship. It seems rather that the other characters have misunderstood the concept of loyalty – or perhaps they are simply acting human in the times of insecurity and comfort themselves with the idea that they are protected by an omnipotent, infallible semi-god.

In fact, I think Harry’s loyalty to Dumbledore is of pretty healthy sort. It simply implies that that he has (or rather had) accepted Dumbledore as the leader of the Cause, and thus would support him and his actions publicly. This is in a way just an extension of the loyalty to the Cause, because it is essential for the success. It does not imply that one should always agree. Unfortunately, some other characters seem to be substituting their thinking with Dumbledore’s word.

In fact, I think Harry’s loyalty to Dumbledore is of pretty healthy sort. It simply implies that that he has (or rather had) accepted Dumbledore as the leader of the Cause, and thus would support him and his actions publicly. This is in a way just an extension of the loyalty to the Cause, because it is essential for the success. It does not imply that one should always agree. Unfortunately, some other characters seem to be substituting their thinking with Dumbledore’s word.
I think that in general, people relied on Dumbledore too much, and for this reason, the order will have trouble functioning without him.

Harry's loyalty to Dumbledore up to OotP was not of the healthy sort, in my opinion. Dumbledore gave almost no information to Harry, but still expected Harry to follow him blindly. After Dumbledore confided in Harry in the end of OotP, Harry followed Dumbledore out of choice, with enough information to choose. Harry is able to act independently, while remaining "Dumbledore's man through and through". The most poignant part of HPB is Dumbledore's statement that he is not worried because he is with Harry. Dumbledore's trust in Harry (both in information and trusting him to act on his own) help Harry follow Dumbledore in a healthy and productive fashion.

I think that in general, people relied on Dumbledore too much, and for this reason, the order will have trouble functioning without him.
My thoughts exactly! Perhaps (I hope) there are key people whom Dumbledore have conveyed more information and who are able to think themselves, but on the surface, Snape seems the only such person, and he is hardly in position to lead the Order now... Well, Harry too, but he has his own quest.

Harry's loyalty to Dumbledore up to OotP was not of the healthy sort, in my opinion. Dumbledore gave almost no information to Harry, but still expected Harry to follow him blindly. After Dumbledore confided in Harry in the end of OotP, Harry followed Dumbledore out of choice, with enough information to choose. Harry is able to act independently, while remaining "Dumbledore's man through and through".
I think Dumbledore's relation to Harry in first five books is quite an interesting question for his character. You are right that only in HBP did Harry get information that really allowed him to make his own judgement and choice. But did Dumbledore expext Harry to follow him? Dumbledore was purportedlt distancing himself from Harry, and never actually asked him to do anything. Instead, he set some 'baits' for Harry to take up and saw how it would go. Sort of forced Harry to make choices and use his skills, i.e. a teaching method. Morality of this type of pedagogy applied to a small boy can be discussd, but it obviously worked.

From Harry's side, I think it would be fair to apply different criteria for a child when assessing the 'loyalty'. Indeed, I would say in the first books, it was not that much about the loyalty, but trust from Harry's side. He sure hadn't have an adult figure in his life whom he could fully rely on, so in a way Dumbledore pgave him what every child needs - a feeling of security. In that respect Harry's example seems quite similar to Lupin's account on how he came to Hogwarts and finally there was Dumbledore who understood and helped him.

But did Dumbledore expext Harry to follow him? Dumbledore was purportedlt distancing himself from Harry, and never actually asked him to do anything. Instead, he set some 'baits' for Harry to take up and saw how it would go. Sort of forced Harry to make choices and use his skills, i.e. a teaching method. Morality of this type of pedagogy applied to a small boy can be discussd, but it obviously worked.
During OotP especially, Dumbledore put up spies on Harry without informing him (and still expected Harry to be okay with that once he found out. I mean, would it have been to hard to tell Harry, you need more protection from Voldemort, i'm setting up a guard?).

Even if he felt talking to Harry would be too dangerous, Dumbledore could have written him etc. He could have used patronus messengers, as harry does know how to make one.

Dumbledore also expected harry to go to occlumency classes adn to study it, even though it was a painful experience without bothering to tell Harry any sort of reason.

Dumbledore also expected harry to go to occlumency classes adn to study it, even though it was a painful experience without bothering to tell Harry any sort of reason.

I disagree, I don't think that Dumbledore expected the occlumency lessons to be as painful as they were, I mean he didn't anticipate such an outcome therefore it wouldn't be entirely justified to say that Dumbledore should or did oversee the outcome and inspite of that let Harry carry on with the lessons. ;)

I disagree, I don't think that Dumbledore expected the occlumency lessons to be as painful as they were, I mean he didn't anticipate such an outcome therefore it wouldn't be entirely justified to say that Dumbledore should or did oversee the outcome and inspite of that let Harry carry on with the lessons. ;)


I agree. Dumbledore would never, knowingly, let Harry be in pain -and any other student, for that matter.

That makes me wonder if Dumbledore knows how bad of a teacher Snape is? Does Dumbledore keep an eye on the staff? I mean it is his duty as Headmaster to make sure the students get good education but maybe he leaves it in the teachers' hands once they're appointed?

Quote from janusincantus:
My thoughts exactly! Perhaps (I hope) there are key people whom Dumbledore have conveyed more information and who are able to think themselves, but on the surface, Snape seems the only such person, and he is hardly in position to lead the Order now... Well, Harry too, but he has his own quest.

Yeah exactly...see that's why I get the impression that that book 7 may not be the best book for the Order because I see them as being slightly adrift without Dumbledore.

I wonder though if part of the reason is that Dumbledore really compartmentalized his sharing of information. I mean I get the impression that there was things that he only shared with Harry (the Tom Riddle information perhaps), things he only shared with Snape (the reason for their trust), and then things he shared with McGonagall (the running of the school).

That makes me wonder if Dumbledore knows how bad of a teacher Snape is? Does Dumbledore keep an eye on the staff? I mean it is his duty as Headmaster to make sure the students get good education but maybe he leaves it in the teachers' hands once they're appointed?

According to JKR, he does know, and thinks it just a part of life people are going to have to live with.

Why does Professor Dumbledore allow Professor Snape to be so nasty to the students (especially to Harry, Hermione, and Neville)?

JKR: "Dumbledore believes there are all sorts of lessons in life ... horrible teachers like Snape are one of them!" [From Entertainment Weekly, 2000 interview]

I wonder though if part of the reason is that Dumbledore really compartmentalized his sharing of information. I mean I get the impression that there was things that he only shared with Harry (the Tom Riddle information perhaps), things he only shared with Snape (the reason for their trust), and then things he shared with McGonagall (the running of the school).
I also think this is very much Dumbledore's plan. It would prevent the harm spreading to entire machinery should one part of the plan fail, and also protect the individuals involved. What is mystery, though, is how the co-ordination of the Order organised, if at all - was Dumbledore's master plan to leve the Order in small, self-steering cells.

2. What was his family like - was he married and did he have children? What kind of parentage did he come from? What was his relationship with Aberforth like?
Most likely, Dumbledore didn't get married and have kids or they probably would have at least been mentioned in the book. He was probably the oldest child and also the favored child, because his brother, Aberforth, doesn't even know how to read.

4. How did Dumbledore know James & Lilyl had been killed so quickly after it happened? How did he know Lily had invoked "ancient magic" with her sacrifice?
Dumbledore probably knows some curse where you can always know what is going on. Another of my theories is that Dumbledore or someone he knows lives in Godric's Hollow and sent a Patronus to let him know when something bad happened. Dumbledore is smart and could probably put two and two together when he saw Harry among the rubble and would have realized that Lily had protected him somehow.

Please forgive me if I touch on some points others may have already brought up. I only found this thread today and have not had time to read the entire thing.

I am dissapointed to see that it is not a hot thread, because there is so much more to Dumbledore than meets the eye, just like Snape, but for different reasons.

I like something Silver Ink Pot said way back on page one about DD being "Ghandi like". I couldn't agree more. Someone else said that when he looked in the mirror of Erised he saw socks. It is said that an enlightned person wants for nothing, and if you want nothing you have everything. So if the only thing he needed in his life to be happy was a new pair of socks, he was well on the way to being a truly enlighteded being.

Many other aspects of his personality would point in that direction as well. When Harry gets so mad he starts smashing the gizmos in DD's office he tells him to go ahead and destroy his possessions, "I dare say I have too many." Enlightened people have no need for material possessions. They have no need for positions of political power (Minister of Magic), but prefer to pass on their knowledge (teach). They help people and trust people and set high expectations of the people around them because they know that people tend to do what is expected of them. If you don't trust a person, you will usually find that he/she does something to betray your trust. On the other hand, if you trust someone and put your faith in them, they rarly let you down.

Along the same enlightened lines, DD spends a lot of time alone, I think, because he needs time away from others to recharge his batteries, connect with the universe and draw from its energy, in other words, to meditate. This is difficult when you are surrounded by people whose lives are full of problems. His meditation time would also give him the ability to see life from a different perspective than the rest of us, and to stay calm in the face of any situation. He would not be afraid of death, because he is insightful enough to know that death is not the end, it is only a transition, a curve in the path to enlightenment.

Another point I have wanted to bring up for a long time is this: is DD really dead? And even if the answer is "yes", could he come back to life like a phoenix? I know JKR said in her interview with MuggleNet and TLC that he really was dead, but there are a sequence of events in cannon that really make me wonder. On page 591 of HBP he is trying to convince Draco to come over to the good side and says, "He cannot kill you if you are already dead." Then Snape proceeds to kill him - or does he? I must admit that if DD didn't actually die, Snape would have met his demise from the Unbreakable Vow, so perhaps DD did actually die, but the way it happened was strange. On pg. 596 HBP we read: ..."he was forced to watch as Dumbledore was blasted into the air. For a split second, he seemed to hang suspended beneath the shining skull, and then he fell slowly backward, like a great rag doll, over the battlements and out of sight." Italics are mine. Hasn't everyone else that we see get hit by that curse fallen violently to the ground? Why did DD float slowly?

But the real question for me comes at the funeral. On pg. 645 HBP it reads: "Bright, white flames had erupted around Dumbledore's body and the table upon which it lay: Higher and higher they rose, obscuring the body. White smoke spiraled into the air and made strange shapes: Harry thought, for one heart-stopping moment, that he saw a phoenix fly joyfully into the blue, but next second the fire had vanished. In its place was a white marble tomb, encasing Dumbledore's body and the table on which he had rested." Again, the italics are mine. If indeed DD is dead, when the flames obscured the body, could he have been reborn as a phoenix and flown away? The flames hide what happens, the the tomb replaces the flames. Is the body really still in there? Or did he do what any self respecting phoenix would do and rise from the ashes?

Maybe this is the wrong thread for this line of questioning, but I can't help but wonder, and I wouldn't put it past DD to do something like this. If he really died, Snape wouldn't have to die for breaking the Unbreakable vow. If he registered as an anamagus when he was young (and I read earlier that he was around 150 years old when he died) then when Hermione did her search in GoF she would not have seen his name on the list because she only went back 1 century. Everything about him points to his being a phoenix anamagus. He has a phoenix, the Order he founded to fight Voldemort is the Order of the Phoenix, and he, like Faux, looks really pitiful on his "burning day."

JKR said he was dead, and I am probably beating a dead horse here. Does anyone have any other thoughts on this?

Many other aspects of his personality would point in that direction as well. When Harry gets so mad he starts smashing the gizmos in DD's office he tells him to go ahead and destroy his possessions, "I dare say I have too many." Enlightened people have no need for material possessions. They have no need for positions of political power (Minister of Magic), but prefer to pass on their knowledge (teach). They help people and trust people and set high expectations of the people around them because they know that people tend to do what is expected of them. If you don't trust a person, you will usually find that he/she does something to betray your trust. On the other hand, if you trust someone and put your faith in them, they rarly let you down.

I actually think teaching is the key to his "immortality." He, unlike Voldemort, wouldn't want to live forever. But he, unlike Voldemort, will have people who are loyal to him and carry on his legacy long after he is dead. (Well, Voldemort had Bella I guess :lol:, but still ...)

Or did he do what any self respecting phoenix would do and rise from the ashes?

I think Harry's going to be the new phoenix who rises from the ashes. :)

JKR said he was dead, and I am probably beating a dead horse here. Does anyone have any other thoughts on this?

She also said that people need to go through the six stages of grief and get over it, that she's saying the old wizard with the white beard always gets it, and that she was very upset by his death, though she'd known for years what was coming and had done her mourning already. I really don't think he's coming back.

But the real question for me comes at the funeral. On pg. 645 HBP it reads: "Bright, white flames had erupted around Dumbledore's body and the table upon which it lay: Higher and higher they rose, obscuring the body. White smoke spiraled into the air and made strange shapes: Harry thought, for one heart-stopping moment, that he saw a phoenix fly joyfully into the blue, but next second the fire had vanished. In its place was a white marble tomb, encasing Dumbledore's body and the table on which he had rested." Again, the italics are mine. If indeed DD is dead, when the flames obscured the body, could he have been reborn as a phoenix and flown away? The flames hide what happens, the the tomb replaces the flames. Is the body really still in there? Or did he do what any self respecting phoenix would do and rise from the ashes?
Well, JKR told us he is really gone. And it is the narrator who tells us that Dumbledore’s body is in the white marble tomb, this is not Harry thinking that the body is inside the tomb; it is the narrator telling us so.

I think you are misled by the symbols used by JKR here. JKR uses the picture of a bird to symbolise the passing of a soul of one plane of existence to the next. Birds are often used for this. Usually doves but for Dumbledore it is the bird which he is associated with: the phoenix.
This is the scene:
Bright, white flames had erupted around Dumbledore's body and the table upon which it lay: higher and higher they rose, obscuring the body. White smoke spiralled into the air and made strange shapes: Harry thought for one heart-stopping moment, that he saw a phoenix fly joyfully into the blue, but next second the fire had vanished. In its place was a white marble tomb, encasing Dumbledore's body and the table on which it rested.
What is literally going on echoes Fawke's burning day: The sudden flames, the smoke and the pile of ashes. However, this re-birth is a bit different: instead of ashes we get a tomb and instead of an ugly Phoenix chick, we get Dumbledore's body in a tomb. There has been a re-birth - it's just that this re-birth is not in the physical plane. How do we know?

Because of the smoke and the bird flying. Both of these images are traditional symbols of going from one plane of existence to the next. Why a Phoenix when any old bird would do? (Think of all those white doves in the medieval paintings that stand for the Holy Spirit) Because the phoenix is the bird associated with Dumbledore, thus JKR has used the same language to talk about Dumbledore's re-birth into a spiritual plane as she did when she describe Fawkes's re-birth into a physical plane.

I actually think teaching is the key to his "immortality." He, unlike Voldemort, wouldn't want to live forever. But he, unlike Voldemort, will have people who are loyal to him and carry on his legacy long after he is dead. (Well, Voldemort had Bella I guess :lol:, but still ...)



I think Harry's going to be the new phoenix who rises from the ashes. :)



She also said that people need to go through the six stages of grief and get over it, that she's saying the old wizard with the white beard always gets it, and that she was very upset by his death, though she'd known for years what was coming and had done her mourning already. I really don't think he's coming back.

Yeah, I do remember that she even shot down a web site that was totally dedicated to the idea that he was not really dead. I guess I just don't want to let go.

[QUOTE=staniw;4238734
What is literally going on echoes Fawke's burning day: The sudden flames, the smoke and the pile of ashes. However, this re-birth is a bit different: instead of ashes we get a tomb and instead of an ugly Phoenix chick, we get Dumbledore's body in a tomb. There has been a re-birth - it's just that this re-birth is not in the physical plane. How do we know?

Because of the smoke and the bird flying. Both of these images are traditional symbols of going from one plane of existence to the next. Why a Phoenix when any old bird would do? (Think of all those white doves in the medieval paintings that stand for the Holy Spirit) Because the phoenix is the bird associated with Dumbledore, thus JKR has used the same language to talk about Dumbledore's re-birth into a spiritual plane as she did when she describe Fawkes's re-birth into a physical plane.[/QUOTE]

I really like this analysis. I hadn't thought of it that way. Thanks.

I believe that Dumbledore is not really dead. Physically, maybe, but his legacy will not leave Harry through his journey in the 7 book. The topics he thought more important (love, loyalty, friendship) are things so essential for those who know how to value them.

I think J.K. created this character in such a great way. She made him so wise, a role model to Harry and to so many others, who might even consider him perfect, but at the same time she made him so human. He loved, he made mistakes, and he accepted them. That is one of the most wonderful things about this character.

And even though Harry became too attached to his Headmaster, the loyalty his feels is really admirable, and proves that he won't fall in the Dark Side too easily. He'll go on fighting.

There is so much more to say about him. His personal life, his past, his relationship with Harry's parents and with Voldermort himself. Though we get to see a lot of that in HBP, there's still more to uncover. I'm sure we'll see more of him in the 7th book.

Rell- Cuddles did not mean that he was physically alive. I think Cuddles stated that rather early in the post.

That was a very touching speech, Cuddles. :)
:welcome: to CoS!
Though, you know, I don't think Harry became too attached to Dumbledore. Harry loved and he lost. Better for him to have loved so much. :D

Dumbledore. I love this guy. As a character, I really believe he is a literary icon worthy of challenging greats like Holmes or the oft-quoted Gandalf, which is amazing considering the relatively short span of time dear old Dubbly-dorr has been in existence.

Double-D is brimming with admirable character traits. He is brave, and intelligent, and wise, and kind, and funny, and courteous, and has much more style than a 150-year old man should be allowed to have. We love him because people like Dumbledore are rare nowadays. At least, that's why I think I love him. I mean, how often do you meet a person who is unfailingly polite not only to his friends and admirers, but even to his enemies? It takes massive class to not lose your temper with someone like Fudge or Umbridge.

I connected most strongly with the one ideal that I believe Dumbledore held most dear- fairness. He is fair and equal-handed to everyone he knows. And not only the pure-blood/muggleborn thing, but issues like Hagrid's parentage or Malfoy's conflicted loyalties don't stop him from giving everyone a fair chance.

One scene in particular stands out, that being the interrogation of Harry and Marietta in Phoenix. You have this girl who betrayed the group she was a part of, forcing him in the end to flee from Hogwarts, yet he was brought to something close like anger when Umbridge mistreated her. For all she's done, Dumbledore still cares about Marietta. I probably can't emphasise enough how wonderful it is to read about someone who honestly doesn't care where you came from or how you look, but what is it you're going to do that matters the most. In this day and age when people are more divided than ever, ol' Albus is a shining pillar of inspiration.

I agree with everything you have said, Finn_Solomon. Dumbledore has lived to see both good and bad, and he has gained an almost infinite wealth of wisdom from it. In that, I really admire him (you can guess how Ravenclaw-ish I am, right? ;)).

By the way, :welcome: to CoS! That was one of the best first posts I've seen. :cool:
And I love your use of "Double-D". Are you thinking of the same thing I am? :lol:

Thank you for the lovely welcome Ignisia. I must confess, I have been a lurker on these boards for quite some time and I was half-wondering whether you would notice my first post. You have quite the knack for greeting us first-timers. :D

And unless Dumbledore hung out with the Dukes and Daisy, there really isn't any significance to Double-D! :lol:

That was a really nice post, Finn_ Solomon. I totally agree with you. And I also agree with Ignisia, who said it was better for Harry to have loved so much. True!

Oh, and thanks for the welcoming message! So nice of you :D.

:lol: I was actually thinking of something completely different regarding "Double-D", Finn_Solomon.

And yeah. In a previous life, I was probably a WalMart greeter. XD
Welcome to CoS! Welcome to CoS! Welcome to CoS!...

Anyway....uh. Dumbledore.
He was old
he was bold
young minds he would mold
their loyalty he'll hold
long after he's cold.

And now the topic
is not so distantly microscopic.

Anyway....uh. Dumbledore.
He was old
he was bold
young minds he would mold
their loyalty he'll hold
long after he's cold.

And now the topic
is not so distantly microscopic.

Love the poetry! Thanks for the chuckle.

Though, you know, I don't think Harry became too attached to Dumbledore. Harry loved and he lost. Better for him to have loved so much.
Though I thought that Dumbledore and Harry's attachment became unhealthy at times, for the most part, it was a wonderful part of the series. I like at the end of SS/PS where Harry calls Voldemort "You Know Who" and Dumbledore corrects him. I don't think that Harry ever corrected himself for saying Voldemort's name after that. He really trusted Dumbledore's judgment.

I also loved how in HPB Dumbledore really showed his high expectations and trust in Harry. But even so, Harry did not act very independently for their common shared goals (against voldemort), which is one of the reasons that I think Dumbledore had to die from a literary perspective; Harry has to stop depending on Dumbledore to take charge.

I connected most strongly with the one ideal that I believe Dumbledore held most dear- fairness. He is fair and equal-handed to everyone he knows. And not only the pure-blood/muggleborn thing, but issues like Hagrid's parentage or Malfoy's conflicted loyalties don't stop him from giving everyone a fair chance. One scene in particular stands out, that being the interrogation of Harry and Marietta in Phoenix. You have this girl who betrayed the group she was a part of, forcing him in the end to flee from Hogwarts, yet he was brought to something close like anger when Umbridge mistreated her. For all she's done, Dumbledore still cares about Marietta. I probably can't emphasise enough how wonderful it is to read about someone who honestly doesn't care where you came from or how you look, but what is it you're going to do that matters the most. In this day and age when people are more divided than ever, ol' Albus is a shining pillar of inspiration.
Those are also things that I admire a lot about Dumbledore. He is so superior in intelligence and practical ability to everyone else that it would be so easy for him to act superior. Before he was Headmaster, he was a teacher, and I find it amazing that he was able to break down all that information into something simple enough for an 11 year old to understand.

Even so, I find Dumbledore to be a confusing character. There are times when what he overlooks is bizarre. For instance, harry nearly killing malfoy. Or taking the house championship away from slytherin. Or not giving Harry any much needed support in OotP. What do people think is to account for this behavior?

(btw: @ignisia: I noticed that right after I had posted and deleted my post. I didn't even see that you'd mentioned it until just now :blush:)

I also loved how in HPB Dumbledore really showed his high expectations and trust in Harry. But even so, Harry did not act very independently for their common shared goals (against voldemort), which is one of the reasons that I think Dumbledore had to die from a literary perspective; Harry has to stop depending on Dumbledore to take charge.

Good point. It really reminded me of two quotes from HBP:

"If there is an attack," said Dumbledore, "I give you permission to use any counterjinx or curse that might occur to you. However, I do not think that you need worry about being attacked tonight."
"Why not, sir?"
"You are with me," said Dumbledore simply.

"It's going to be all right, sir," Harry said over and over again, more worried by Dumbledore's silence than he had been by his weakened voice. "We're nearly there....I can Apparate us both back....Don't worry...."
"I am not worried, Harry," said Dumbledore, his voice a little stronger despite the freezing water. "I am with you."

It's like Dumbledore has passed the torch to Harry. It is up to Harry to finish his "journey" on his own.


Even so, I find Dumbledore to be a confusing character. There are times when what he overlooks is bizarre. For instance, harry nearly killing malfoy. Or taking the house championship away from slytherin. Or not giving Harry any much needed support in OotP. What do people think is to account for this behavior?

It is odd that Dumbledore did not go into the Sectumsempra incident. He must have heard about it from Snape, since McGonagall learned of it as well. The whole thing could have been an expellable offense, but Dumbledore doesn't do it. Sometimes I think that he does try to keep Harry out of trouble, since Harry is basically the world's last hope.

Taking the championship from Slytherin after decorating the Great Hall was apalling, IMO. It's like giving a kid a sweet and than taking it away as they raise it to their mouth. I really have no idea why Dumbledore did that. He could have added those points before the feast, and have saved a quarter of his student body from embarrassment. It's probably the only instance where Dumbledore does something unfair (to the students). Normally he is unbiased. He even offers Draco (and his family) unconditional protection, knowing full well that Draco is a Death Eater. I'm wondering, why the change of heart from PS/SS to HBP, regarding Draco.


(btw: @ignisia: I noticed that right after I had posted and deleted my post. I didn't even see that you'd mentioned it until just now :blush:)

No problem. :cool:

Even so, I find Dumbledore to be a confusing character. There are times when what he overlooks is bizarre. For instance, harry nearly killing malfoy. Or taking the house championship away from slytherin. Or not giving Harry any much needed support in OotP. What do people think is to account for this behavior?

I agree with the points thing but really, he should expell Harry for casting a spell he didn't know in self defense in a fight he didn't start against an oponent that was going to cast the most painfull curse known to wizardkind to him. What about malfoy then, he on purpose, almost kills Katie and Ron and endangers all the students of the school letting Death Eaters in, isn't that a reason to expel someone?
Actually the Malfoy thing really bothers me about Dumbledore in HBP. He knew Malfoy was trying to do something, he knew he was behind the attack to Katie Bell, yet he wants to see if Draco come to his senses alone and gives him a second chance, I agree with the philosophy but he actually had no right to do that. If he wanted to help him he should have forced him into hiding right away. By not doing so he is taking a big gamble with the life of his students, he endangered them. We almost lost Ron because of this, he was saved by a miracle. If he had died Dumbledore would have been totally responsible for it. Imagine the scene " Oh Harry Im deeply sorry your best friend has died but I had to see if Draco could come to the good side without help". It was his responsability and he had the power to do it and save Draco at the same time.

good points about Malfoy, Darksquirrel. Once Malfoy started jeapordizing student safety (even if Dumbledore was not worried about his own safety), he should have removed Malfoy from the school and into hiding (whether Malfoy wanted it or not). In Dumbledore's defense, there may have been other circumstances preventing this (perhaps having to do with the unbreakable vow), but allowing Malfoy free in the school was a reckless risk of student safety.

nice quotes, ignisia.

Well, DarkSquirrel, I'm of the opinion that Dumbledore didn't interfere with Draco because he believed that Draco was reporting to Voldemort. He had no idea whether or not revealing that he knew Draco's plan would cause Voldemort to kill the boy.
However, it is true that Dumbledore should have thought about the damage Draco would cause. I think he believed that Draco's attempts were too sloppy to ever hurt anyone. Dumbledore underestimated Draco, to his great cost.

That's why I said that he should have forced him into hiding, Voldemort can not touch him if he can not find him. Dumbledore could have done that easily, as he offers it at the tower scene, but instead he gambled with the lives of his students in the hope that he would see the error of his ways, lives that where not his to gamble with in the first place and where his responsibility as headmaster as well. Not his finest moment if you ask me, either that or a big plot hole. It wouldn't be the first.

I think he believed that Draco's attempts were too sloppy to ever hurt anyone. Dumbledore underestimated Draco, to his great cost.After Katie and Ron both nearly died, I'd think Dumbledore could have taken the hint.

That's why I said that he should have forced him into hiding, Voldemort can not touch him if he can not find him. Dumbledore could have done that easily, as he offers it at the tower scene, but instead he gambled with the lives of his students in the hope that he would see the error of his ways, lives that where not his to gamble with in the first place and where his responsibility as headmaster as well. Not his finest moment if you ask me, either that or a big plot hole. It wouldn't be the first.I tend tot think this was not his finest moment.

Dumbledore, always big on choices, seems to give Draco not the benefit of his choice but rather try to take the consequences of Draco’s choice away. Fat lot of good that would have done to Ron or Katie, people who choose to stand against Voldemort, only to be killed because Dumbledore didn’t want someone who chooses Voldemort’s side to face the consequences of that choice. I’m sure he thought that the man he had set on the situation, Snape, would be able to handle it but other action seemed appropriate when it became clear that Draco didn’t allow Snape to handle him.

There’s a double standard here.

Same with trust really. Dumbledore trusts Snape. He wishes that the others (not just Harry) trust Snape as well yet he don’t trust those people with the reason for his trust. In fact he is telling McGonagall etc. I want you to trust him on my word but in the meantime I don’t trust you enough to give you the reason for my trusting in the first place.

Dumbledore will have had his reasons but it seems iffy to me.

We already saw the consequences of his not telling Harry the identity of the eavesdropper. Harry explodes when he hears it was Snape. Dumbledore could have managed this when he had confided in Harry the situation himself, on his terms, instead of being faced with a very angry Harry. This not trusting Harry at the end of OOTP has done unnecessarily damage to the relation between Harry and Snape, damage which Dumbledore could have prevented if only he had trusted Harry enough at the end of OOTP or the beginning of HBP.

Dumbledore knew, but didn't want Draco to be in trouble, that's why he didn't act before.

‘I appreciate the difficulty of your position,’ said Dumbledore. ‘Why else do you think I have not confronted you before now? Because I knew you would have been murdered if Lord Voldemort realised that I suspected you.’
Malfoy winced at the sound of the name.
‘I did not dare speak to you of the mission with which I knew you had been entrusted, in case he used Legilimency against you,’ continued Dumbledore. ‘But now at last we can speak plainly to each other… no harm has been done, you have hurt nobody, though you are very lucky that your unintentional victims survived… I can help you, Draco.’

So he knew about it, but didn't want to risk Draco's life. A noble act, since it would have been easier to confront him and let Voldemort kill him. It would have save him a problem. But instead, he risked everything to protect the life of the person that had been intending to kill him. This man never ceases to amaze me, really.

But as I was looking for this part of the book to quote, I came across and interesting thing. A few paragraphs later, it says:

‘But I got this far, didn’t I?’ he said slowly. ‘They thought I’d die in the attempt, but I’m here… and you’re in my power… I’m the one with the wand… you’re at my mercy…’
‘No, Draco,’ said Dumbledore quietly. ‘It is my mercy, and not yours, that matters now.’

What does he mean by that, I never got to know, because then the Death Eaters came, and you all know what happened next. But it is really interesting, how calm he is, as if he was hiding something, as if he was prepared for this. What do you think?

Great post stainw, I completely agree with everything you said.

And cuddles really, reread my post, Dumbledore could have forced Draco into hiding easily at any point in the year but risked the life of his students only because his own ideology. After katie it's inexcusable, but after Ron, it was really unforgivable.

Then we must agree to disagree. Firstly, he couldn't have forced Draco into hiding, for the simple reason that you can't be saved if you don't want to be saved. I believe his decision not to interfere with Draco was good. But again, we can have different opinions, and it's okay.

cuddles, what do you think Dumbledore should have done to protect the students?

Then we must agree to disagree. Firstly, he couldn't have forced Draco into hiding, for the simple reason that you can't be saved if you don't want to be saved. I believe his decision not to interfere with Draco was good. But again, we can have different opinions, and it's okay.

I'm inclined to agree with Cuddles here alright, if someone wants to be saved then great, if someone has no interest in being saved and is basically trying to kill you well it get's very very difficult nay impossible to save them.

Dumbledore I'm sure could have forced Draco into hiding magically or physically but it was very against they way he operates. As Dumbledore himself said, it is our choices that define us more than our actions. Giving Draco the chance to alter his course of action was more his style.

If Draco didn't want to be saved it was time for him to learn another important lesson in life, to accept the consequences of your actions, he should have been expelled. The problem with Dumbledore decision it's not the ideology behind it, we all know his reasons, it's simply that it was not his decision to make. The safety of the students was his responsibility as Headmaster and he completely disregarded it. Ron accident was totally his responsibility, think what would have happened if a bezoar was not in that room, or Harry had taken a split second more to react.

As Dumbledore himself said, it is our choices that define us more than our actions. Giving Draco the chance to alter his course of action was more his style.But Dumbledore let other people (Katie, Ron, Slughorn) face the consequences of this line of thinking.

Originally Dumbledore probably thought only he was endangered by letting Draco find his way.
But this changed when other people almost died because of Draco’s actions. Then his style endangered other people instead of himself.

What chance did Dumbledore gave Katie and Ron? Getting angry at Snape doesn’t quit cut it.

He had no way to prove it was Draco anyway. And I believe he acted just as he should have. He couldn't confront Draco, because that would mean that Voldemort might hurt him or kill him if he found out. He couldn't just walk straight to Draco and tell him, 'Hey dude, would you mind not trying to kill me?' He instead tried to act via Snape, who was supposed to talk him out of it.

And Rell, I don't really know, but I'm sure he tried to protect them as much as he could. Maybe he could have tried to warn them, but then again, he couldn't do it openly, because that would mean exposing Draco. What do you think?

Again, that decision, not matter the morality or reason behind it, was not his to make. He did something that he had no right to do, he risked the lifes of his students, students that truted him with their security.
And actually he could have done exactly what you said, confront Draco, tell him that he know what he is trying to do and offer a solution. The moment he speaks with Draco a suden lighting bolt is not going to kill the kid on the spot, he would have time to make the decision, if he refuses he should be expeled and left to face his choices, or captured and kept safe, if he accepts he can be put in somewhere safe where Voldemort can not reach him.
The rest is exposed really well by stainw.

I don't know if I'm crazy or what, but I understand the way he acted, and I think he did the correct thing. No matter how many people tell me that he was wrong and irresponsible, I don't question the way he acted, because instead of sending Draco to an imminent death, he tried to persuade him by other means. Maybe it was risky for the other students, but even though he knew what Draco was trying to do, he cared for his life, for the life of a person that wanted to kill him. That’s what I find amazing.

I'm inclined to agree with Cuddles. Dumbledore didn't have many choices on the matter, IMO.

Well I can't think of anything else to say on that topic, so I guess we'll just have to disagree :).

I'd like to comment on something else that I noticed about Dumbledore's character. He's one of the most talented and brilliant people in the world, and very cognizant of that fact. Yet he is able to relate to everyone, even young children. I know a lot of really smart people who cannot explain simple things like fractions to someone who's never heard of them before, yet Dumbledore is a teacher. He is also able to relate to the emotional and social needs of everyone (with some exceptions of course).

Good point. It makes me think he's probably had a lot of experience as a teacher. And it also tells us that he believes in his students. He wants to raise them to their highest potential because he knows they can do it. That must give him and the child confidence, assuming the child wants to learn.

Yeah, I was just noticing a few examples:
1) At the end of SS/PS, when Dumbledore is talking to Harry, he knows to look away while Harry is gaining control of himself over talking about his parents.
2) At the end of GoF, Dumbledore does what he has to while being very sensitive to Harry's needs, like telling the Weasleys not to question him, and allowing Sirius to stay.
3) The way Dumbledore talks to Hagrid after Rita Skeeter's article
4) Dumbledore was extremely tactful at the end of OotP, when he knows not to become angry at Harry for destroying his things.

These are just a few examples. there are a lot more.

Yeah, I was just noticing a few examples:
1) At the end of SS/PS, when Dumbledore is talking to Harry, he knows to look away while Harry is gaining control of himself over talking about his parents.
2) At the end of GoF, Dumbledore does what he has to while being very sensitive to Harry's needs, like telling the Weasleys not to question him, and allowing Sirius to stay.
3) The way Dumbledore talks to Hagrid after Rita Skeeter's article
4) Dumbledore was extremely tactful at the end of OotP, when he knows not to become angry at Harry for destroying his things.

These are just a few examples. there are a lot more.

I absolutely agree. Dumbledore was wise enough to understand what Harry needed the times he, Harry, really was in need of company, solace, or overall comfort. He never intruded unless it was absolutely necessary (i.e. Umbridge mistreating Marietta Edgecomb in OotP) Aside from Harry, the students were very important to Dumbledore and he would go to any lengths to protect them.

I completely agree. He knows when to be sensitive, when to be firm, when to be a friend. He is so wise and intelligent, yet he acts humbly, as if he were not different to the rest of the people. He doesn't judge people by what they are born, but what who they are, and even when they are evil, he always tries to give them a chance.

He is so powerful, he could have it all, he could defeat Lord Voldemort and try to take over the world, yet he remains calm. He doesn't use all his power and knowledge for evil, but instead tries to fight it. How? With love, faith, and good intentions. He treats all his students, all creatures, as his equals. He cares for them.

It's interesting that you name "humble" as one of Dumbledore's traits, cuddles, because while I do agree with you, I don't think that it's an obvious trait. Many times in the books, Dumbledore mentions his own high level of intelligence and abilities, which can be misleading. But although Dumbledore is full aware of his superiority in these regards, he never regards himself as a better person for having these traits, and uses these characteristics to take on responsibility. So I agree with you that he is a humble person.

I am glad to hear that :) I know this is off topic, but I've been asking myself this for a long time. What does that little star under your post count mean?

I think it means that Rell has been on CoS for one year. :D
So you must get two stars when you hit two years. :agree:

And yes, I think Dumbledore is humble. He sees everyone, including himself, as equal in value.
Sometimes he has to make decisions that sometimes hurt those he cares for, but only after having considered everyone and everything.

I think Dumbledore is also very confident in himself. He knows that he is more clever than most people, and so thinks he is more likely to be right. Sometimes he is wrong. But he always acknowledges his mistakes. He has learned a lot from his life.

After Katie and Ron both nearly died, I'd think Dumbledore could have taken the hint.

I think Dumbledore knew (via Snape, perhaps) that after the Katie thing Draco would not try anything of the sort again. The poisoned mead happened later, but was set in motion before Snape ever talked to Draco about the Katie Bell incident. (Since it involved a purchase of a Christmas present by Slughorn).

And Dumbledore did take all sorts of steps to protect the students. We read about all these security measures that were new that year. I am sure that, in designing them, Dumbledore considered what Draco was up to. If they were not perfect, that is not a moral failing, but a failure to imagine all the possible ways to circumvent his security arrangements. (Along with the big one he missed, the Vanishing Cabinet).

I think Dumbledore knew (via Snape, perhaps) that after the Katie thing Draco would not try anything of the sort again. The poisoned mead happened later, but was set in motion before Snape ever talked to Draco about the Katie Bell incident. (Since it involved a purchase of a Christmas present by Slughorn).

And Dumbledore did take all sorts of steps to protect the students. We read about all these security measures that were new that year. I am sure that, in designing them, Dumbledore considered what Draco was up to. If they were not perfect, that is not a moral failing, but a failure to imagine all the possible ways to circumvent his security arrangements. (Along with the big one he missed, the Vanishing Cabinet).
I don't think that Snape knew anything about Draco's plans, or very little at least. It's true though, that we don't really know what security measures were put in place. These security measures could have been seemingly sufficient, even though Draco got through them anyway.

I loved DD but I did disagree severely with how he handled the Snape vs Harry situation. If Snape truly is on Voldemort's side I think that one of the gravest mistakes DD ever made was how he treated Snape against the Marauders. DD practically let the Marauders get away with murder and Snape has never had the justice he felt he deserved. DD just assumed Snape would manage to get over his grudge long enough to teach Harry whether it be potions of occlumency. Snape failed at both. Harry would never have said anything to any of the other teachers about Snape. He's not the type who goes running to the teachers like a complainer. He really couldn't since he was the "chosen one" and the other teachers might have looked down on hims badly because of it. Harry took it all in even though Snape was down right horrible. DD believes in letting people solve their own problems and figuring things out on their own. In many cases this is a good policy but in the case of Snape and Harry, DD should have stepped in a long time ago. However maybe the reason DD let it all go on for so long was because allowing Snape to be nasty to Harry without giving him serious bodily harm was the only way Snape could exact his revenge against James through terrorizing Harry. I honestly don't think even if DD had stepped in with Snape it would have done that much good. Snape's meaness just seemed to boil over. I don't think Snape was capable of controlling himself around Harry. His emotions are usually kept in check but around Harry they went haywire.

There is one thing I really have a hard time dealing with and its if Snape really is working for Voldemort full time and he accepted Snape back with some poor excuse for a heartfelt apology he has potentially endangered the entire Order. DD was too trusting. Given the times they were living in it was an insane risk to be taking with Snape. Allowing an ex DE into his inner circle the way he did? DD atleast owed it to the Order to come clean with why he accepted Snape back since they were practically placing their lives in his hands. Perhaps the reason DD refused to divulge his reasons for allowing Snape into the Order was because he knew the other members would have a difficult time accepting Snape's apology and refuse to admit him. All I can say for Snape is that must have been one hell of an apology for DD to honestly think he had repented. Not even fasting for three days then dragging himself across the great hall on all fours to DD's chair to drink his dirty foot water seems enough to me. I think I would require more than heartfelt apology. Snape was a DE so he has done and seen some terrible things. I mean if Bellatrix Lestrange went crawling back to DD to repent her sins and DD accepted her back I'd say the man was completely loony.

Well, we don't know for sure that Dumbledore let the marauders get away with everything in respect to Snape. We don't know what he did or didn't do. On the other hand, Dumbledore himself agreed that it was one of his biggest mistakes to think that Snape could get over his grudge in respect to Harry, so I agree with you there.

Though it does seem at times that Dumbledore gives Harry too much leeway. For instance, I don't think I approve of the fact that Dumbledore found it almost humorous that Harry went into Snape's memories. It would be kind of pointless to punish Harry so much after the fact (Dumbledore was no longer headmaster at the time), but he should have been reproving.

---------
As for Dumbledore trusting Snape - I'm still assuming that Snape did or said something that we don't know about.

As for Dumbledore trusting Snape - I'm still assuming that Snape did or said something that we don't know about.

I agree with that. I don't think that what made Dumbledore trust Snape was that thing about the Potters, it must be something a little bit more important.

4) Dumbledore was extremely tactful at the end of OotP, when he knows not to become angry at Harry for destroying his things.
I agree that Dumbledore takes care to be tactful with people's feelings, and so he handles tense situations well. But I'm not sure that the scene at the end of OotP was one of them. I think there Dumbledore's own sense of guilt played a part in his actions. Dumbledore stayed calm and allowed Harry to rage until he finally stopped to listen, which was the right thing to do. But also Dumbledore must have been feeling that he deserved Harry's anger and the destruction of his possessions. I think some of that calmness was guilt over Harry's pain, Dumbledore's own sorrow at Sirius' death, and more guilt that Sirius had died while Dumbledore was trying to protect him.

I never thought of it from that angle, sholeigh, but I don't think that Dumbledore is the type to punish himself that way. I think that he was very focused on harry's needs at that point, as he realized that he had been neglegting them for too long.

I never thought of it from that angle, sholeigh, but I don't think that Dumbledore is the type to punish himself that way. I think that he was very focused on harry's needs at that point, as he realized that he had been neglegting them for too long.

I disagree. I saw that situation from sholeigh's perspective as well. I trusted Dumbledore when he said that part of the blame of Sirius's death should be on him. To be honest, I think it was both Harry and DD's fault but if DD had told Harry about the Prophecy earlier, maybe Harry would have tried to control his curiosity. By blaming himself, I think Dumbledore was indeed a bit guilty, but I don't deny that Dumbledore has a talent of understanding Harry's needs.

I never thought of it from that angle, sholeigh, but I don't think that Dumbledore is the type to punish himself that way. I think that he was very focused on harry's needs at that point, as he realized that he had been neglegting them for too long.
I'm sure he was very concerned about Harry, but I do think his own emotions were very near the surface as well. When Dumbledore explains why he didn't choose Harry as prefect, Harry sees him cry. This chapter is surely meant to show us that Dumbledore is human in all ways, because it's necessary for Harry to see that so he can start to mature. Dumbledore doesn't quite lose control of his emotions, but the usual tight grip he keeps on them slips during this interview.


I disagree. I saw that situation from sholeigh's perspective as well. I trusted Dumbledore when he said that part of the blame of Sirius's death should be on him. To be honest, I think it was both Harry and DD's fault but if DD had told Harry about the Prophecy earlier, maybe Harry would have tried to control his curiosity. By blaming himself, I think Dumbledore was indeed a bit guilty, but I don't deny that Dumbledore has a talent of understanding Harry's needs.
:agree:


As for Dumbledore trusting Snape - I'm still assuming that Snape did or said something that we don't know about.
Before HBP I was sure that the 'power the Dark Lord knows not' couldn't be love - it seemed too simple. But it turned out to be true. I find it hard to believe that Dumbledore trusted Snape just because of what he did for the Potters, but perhaps we're expecting a deep mystery where there isn't one :huh:

Before HBP I was sure tha the 'power the Dark Lord knows not' couldn't be love - it seemed too simple. But it turned out to be true. I find it hard to believe that Dumbledore trusted Snape just because of what he did for the Potters, but perhaps we're expecting a deep mystery where there isn't one :huh:

But Love IS the deep mystery. I have quoted the passage before, but perhaps not on this thread. On pg. 843 of the American Hardback ed. of OotP, Dumbledore tells Harry about the room in the Department of Mysteries that is kept locked at all times. "It contains a force that is at once more wonderful and more terrible than death, than human intelligence, than forces of nautre. It is also, perhaps, the most MYSTERIOUS of the many subjects for study that reside there. It is the power held within that room that you possess in such Quantities and which Voldemort has not at all..." (emphasis mine)

But Love IS the deep mystery. I have quoted the passage before, but perhaps not on this thread. On pg. 843 of the American Hardback ed. of OotP, Dumbledore tells Harry about the room in the Department of Mysteries that is kept locked at all times. "It contains a force that is at once more wonderful and more terrible than death, than human intelligence, than forces of nautre. It is also, perhaps, the most MYSTERIOUS of the many subjects for study that reside there. It is the power held within that room that you possess in such Quantities and which Voldemort has not at all..." (emphasis mine)
I didn't mean that love isn't mysterious. I meant that love was the first conclusion I jumped to for the power mentioned in the Prophecy, but then I rejected it thinking the answer must be less obvious. Perhaps the answer to Dumbledore's trust is also staring us in the face.

And love is what saved Harry in so many occasions, including the first time, when Lily sacrificed her life to save him. And when Voldemort couldn’t touch Harry, it was because of that as well.

This is like every great mystery: the solution seems really hard to find, until you have an answer, and then it seems so obvious you just can't understand why you didn't think about it before. There are so many things that we knew were there, but never thought were important, until Jo said they were. But I still believe there is something about Snape that we don’t know.

I think DD plays a pivotal role in that he teaches Harry how to lead when defending a valued way of life, making a choice for not only the present but for generations unseen.

I also believe it is for that reason that DD had to die (not be disabled). His death passes the torch permanently to Harry who can step into the role apparently assigned to him by Voldemort.

I wouldn't have liked the idea of Harry's power being some complicated thing that only he has. A real person needs to defeat Voldemort, not a superpower. On the other hand, I would really hope that there is more backstory to snape, otherwise Dumbledore trusted him with his students with almost no cause at all.

I'm sure there is. Remember he knew something about Snape that the other members of the Order didn't, and I hope we can find out what exactly is that Snape told Dumbledore to gain his trust.

Awww! Dumbledore is falling behind! The thread needs a bump. :D

In CoS, Tom Riddle says that Dumbledore would keep a close watch on him after the Chamber of Secrets incident. And we know that before Tom arrived at Hogwarts, Dumbledore decided to give him a chance to change. However, Tom's years at Hogwarts were marked by some very nasty incidents.
So here's a question: How much do you think Dumbledore suspected Tom's hand in the problems before the Chamber was opened?

So here's a question: How much do you think Dumbledore suspected Tom's hand in the problems before the Chamber was opened?

I think he had a very good idea of what Riddle was up to. He obviously didn't have any evidence as to his suspicions, but DD has always known what Harry and co. were up to. So, I think it would be the same with Riddle and friends.

Awww! Dumbledore is falling behind! The thread needs a bump. :D
Hooray! :D


What always comes back to my mind with questions like this is the Marauders. Dumbledore told Harry that he never realised the Marauders had learned to become animagi. I always find that strange because at all other times Dumbledore seems so on the ball - incredibly so.

I think that as a teacher rather than headmaster it would have been both easier and more difficult for Dumbledore to watch Tom. He would have (probably) had less authority to question other teachers about Tom's doings, and with Slughorn being head of Slytherin and very fond of Tom, he was unlikely to help Dumbledore in his spying. But on the flip side as a teacher Dumbledore would have more time and reason to be wandering the halls at night (as Snape does in Harry's era), and so keep an eye on Tom's nightly wanderings.

One thought I have is that Tom did a lot of his 'researching' during the holidays, especially during the summer, when there should be few teachers about.

I think that Dumbldore couldn't prove very much - there was likely almost no evidence. Riddle said himself to Harry that he wondered how anyone could have thought Hagrid had the talent and capability to open the chamber. I think that Dumbledore made those same connections. Also, Dumbledore knew right away in CoS that Riddle was in some way influencing events - even if he didn't know how.

And not only was there little evidence against Tom Riddle, but he also had the necessary charm to get on the good side of his teachers.

But Dumbledore, at least at the time of CoS, knew for sure it was Riddle the first time. I wonder what made him so sure.

But Dumbledore, at least at the time of CoS, knew for sure it was Riddle the first time. I wonder what made him so sure.
Dumbledore later learned that Young Riddle became Voldemort, last descendant of Slytherin etc.

But that Dumbledore suspected Riddle was behind a lot of nasty incidents but couldn’t catch him even though he kept a close eye on him does mean there are limitations on Dumbledore’s ability to discover what is going on at Hogwarts. That makes it more logical that he didn’t know the marauders were animagi for instance. Dumbledore is fallible after all.

magicalmystery: I think that Dumbledore was very sure who was behind the facts the first time. I just think that he had absolutely zero evidence.

magicalmystery: I think that Dumbledore was very sure who was behind the facts the first time. I just think that he had absolutely zero evidence.

Plus, just about 2 years later Dumbledore advised Headmaster Dippet against hiring Tom as a DADA professor. This just confirms what you said, Rell.

It's all my fault, all my fault,"
"Please make it stop, I know I did wrong, oh please make it stop and I'll never, never again... "
"Don't hurt them, don't hurt them, please, please, it's my fault, hurt me instead . . ."
"Please, please, please, no... not that, not that, I'll do anything. .."
"No more, please, no more . . .."
"I want to die! I want to die! Make it stop, make it stop, I want to die!"
"KILL ME!" (HBP,572)

Who is he talking about, or what did he do?
This also proves in a way that he isn't perfect, and he has made mistakes in the past.

Oh-that chapter was such an emotional wringer. *sobs*Albus Dumbledore is amazing. I love him.

I love how eccentric he is.

Who is he talking about, or what did he do?
This also proves in a way that he isn't perfect, and he has made mistakes in the past.

I'm pretty sure that whatever was going on with Dumbledore at the time had to do with his students. Dumbledore cared enough about Draco and Harry (current students) and Snape (former student) to die in order to keep them safe for the time. It's not a stretch to think that Dumbledore cares for his students very much.
Perhaps what he is seeing is almost like Voldemort himself-- a mistake (Tom) from Dumbledore's past coming back to bite him and those he loves.

2. What do we know or can we guess of Dumbledore's past?


Since Book 2 CoS we know that Dumbledore used to be the Transfiguration teacher at Hogwarts. What special Transfiguration skills has he then developed? Judging from Prof. McGonagall, who is a registered Animagus, one could assume that Dumbledore that he too is an Animagus. I don't think so though. Dumbledore says in Book 1 in the scene in which he meets Harry at the Mirror at Erised that he, Dumbledore, doesn't need a Cloak to become invisible. So my guess is that his speciality in the field of Transfigeration is Invisibility. Hm throughout the books when Harry sneaks around the castle and the grounds he sometimes feels being watched. Also there are lot of strange coincidental happenings around Harry. For example in CoS Chapter 14 "Cornelius Fudge" Harry and Ron need to talk to Hagrid after Hermione got attacked in the library. So they sneak out of the castle that is patrolled by all the teachers hiding under the Invisibility Cloak. Ron almost stubs his toe and almost gives them both away in front of Snape who *happens* to sneeze at the very right moment. Could this have been caused by a quick Sneezing Spell by someone who was watching the two boys. I don't want to give this particular incident too much significance but I have the feeing that a lot scenes around Harry involve similar *coincidents*.

Though it does seem at times that Dumbledore gives Harry too much leeway. For instance, I don't think I approve of the fact that Dumbledore found it almost humorous that Harry went into Snape's memories. It would be kind of pointless to punish Harry so much after the fact (Dumbledore was no longer headmaster at the time), but he should have been reproving.

I think the reason DD was so lenient was because he hoped that Harry prying into Snape's memories would have helped him to understand Snape's side. Harry until that point had only ever seen how Snape treated others and now he got a chance to see how people treated Snape. I think it was important for Harry to know both sides.

i would have to say that albus dumbledore was a great person all thougrh the books. i think that dumbledore will be able to help harry . ithink that dumbledore will help harry by his porait.:relax:

1. What are your general thoughts on Dumbledore as a character through books 1-6? Do you see a difference in his behavior and/or actions between the books?

I believe his character was very interesting. He was a very powerful wizard which gives him respect. I really enjoyed his offbeat humor and sense of amusement. I think he was a little foolish to not inform harry of everything that he needed to know..It would have saved a lot of trouble, and may have even saved his life.


2. What do we know or can we guess of Dumbledore's past? What was his family like - was he married and did he have children? What kind of parentage did he come from? What was his relationship with Aberforth like?

I'm not really sure...

3. What exactly were Dumbledore's dealings with Grindelwald like? Did he actually kill Grindelwald, or just defeat him? Will this be of any future importance in the books?

I think he wouldn't kill unless absolutly forced to...And I don't think it would really matter as neither character will be a major one in book seven.

4. How did Dumbledore know James & Lily had been killed so quickly after it happened? How did he know Lily had invoked "ancient magic" with her sacrifice? (He must have known because he instructed Hagrid to bring Harry to Privet Drive). What methods did Dumbledore employ in watching over Harry during his time at the Dursleys?

Most likley he already knew of the magics which would have been invoked through the sacrifice. He was also most likely in contact with the member's of the Potter household. He probably had enchantments which would allow him to know of any disturbances.

5. Loyalty - specifically loyalty to Dumbledore - is a theme that has been emphasized many times throughout the books. We've seen Harry's loyalty to Dumbledore call Fawkes to him in a time of dire need. Harry refers to himself as "Dumbledore's man through and through". Why is loyalty to Dumbledore such an important theme in the books? Will loyalty to Dumbledore play an important role for Harry book 7 as he hunts for the horcruxes and battle's Voldemort?

I believe it is important in that DD needed to know he could trust those around him. I do not think it is so much a factor anymore, because it isn't just about loyalty to DD, it's about a fight to save himself and hisfriends.


6. Throughout the books, Dumbledore seems to always be teaching Harry something, but his lessons are sometimes hidden and subtle. What do you believe are the most important lessons Dumbledore taught Harry? Did Dumbledore adequately prepare Harry for the trials that lie ahead in book 7? Is there anything you think Dumbledore should have told Harry before he died?

I believe the most important lesson was the one he taught when he drank the potion in the ccup. He showed that sacrafice, and perserverance were the only tools which could battle Voldermorts horcruxes. I think DD prepared Harry as best as he could before he died, and I believe without those lessons Harry would have dies by the end of Book 2.


7. Will Dumbledore continue to play a role in book 7 despite his death? Will he be able to help Harry from beyond the grave? If so, how?

I think there is more to that pensive more memories which DD placed within it, to guide and help Harry through the final book.

I believe the most important lesson was the one he taught when he drank the potion in the ccup. He showed that sacrafice, and perserverance were the only tools which could battle Voldermorts horcruxes. I think DD prepared Harry as best as he could before he died, and I believe without those lessons Harry would have dies by the end of Book 2.
:welcome: mistude!
This is sort of like Sirius' comment about things worth dying for. Dumbledore is showing Harry here that some things are worth even an unkown sacrafice. But he's also showing Harry his own importance. He's showing Harry that he beleives without a doubt that Harry will be the one to vanquish Voldemort, so he will not in any way sacrafice Harry.

I think this also illustrates a very big difference between Dumbledore and Voldemort. Voldemort would never risk himself, but I'm sure he has no problem risking a follower or too. Dumbledore however, takes risks upon himself.

And the poisoned cup was not the only risk he put on himself in that chapter. He used his own blood to open the cavern, even after Harry offered.

BTW, welcome to CoS, mistude! :cool:

I think that by the time they went to the cave, Dumbledore knew his time was short. Possibly he knew when he got the ring Horcrux. Why else start searching for Horcruxes unless time is short?
And Harry, getting ever closer to adulthood, can't always have someone looking over his shoulder keeping him safe. Dumbledore knew very well that the Prophecy has Harry vanquishing Voldemort, and that he cannot interfere. The final battle is Harry's, and Dumbledore has faith in Harry. All he can do is teach him and show the way.

I think there is more to Dumbledore than most people assume, because he is so trustworthy. It was a long time before I started to wonder about some of the things Dumbledore knew, and had. How did he have the invisibilty cloak? I think that this might play a bigger part in DH. And how did he know about what happened when James and Lily were murdered? He seemed to know a bit too much about what happened.

Here's something I've been thinking about today. Why is splitting your soul so repulsive to Dumbledore? Are we to understand that Dumbledore is religious, even though religion in so many words doesn't appear in the Harry Potter books? In our world if you believe in the soul it is a metaphorical part of our being which is eternal and continues after death. But in the Harry Potter world a soul is a physical thing that can be removed, torn up and even locked inside an artifact. For a wordly man like Dumbledore who befriends giants, muggles and centaurs, why is it so distasteful to him to become less than human?

Thoughts? :)

Here's something I've been thinking about today. Why is splitting your soul so repulsive to Dumbledore? Are we to understand that Dumbledore is religious, even though religion in so many words doesn't appear in the Harry Potter books? In our world if you believe in the soul it is a metaphorical part of our being which is eternal and continues after death. But in the Harry Potter world a soul is a physical thing that can be removed, torn up and even locked inside an artifact. For a wordly man like Dumbledore who befriends giants, muggles and centaurs, why is it so distasteful to him to become less than human?

Thoughts? :)

I think it's because Dumbledore considers being human and experiencing everything that comes with it - love, happiness, loss, pain - incredibly important. I also think that, to him, magic is just another part of being human - so you can't really separate the two, if you get my meaning. And you know, he's seen first hand the power of love and a whole soul, so I don't think he'd have any reason to doubt their importance.

Good question.
I think that Dumbledore doesn't percieve giants, centaurs, merpeople, etc. as less than human, but equal. These creatures are similar to humans in that they feel. Therefore, what he sees repulsive is anything that doesn't feel, or rejects feelings.

I think it's because Dumbledore considers being human and experiencing everything that comes with it - love, happiness, loss, pain - incredibly important. I also think that, to him, magic is just another part of being human - so you can't really separate the two, if you get my meaning. And you know, he's seen first hand the power of love and a whole soul, so I don't think he'd have any reason to doubt their importance. Good point. Splitting your soul would be against nature, denying what you are. It's a sad, ugly thing to imagine doing and the act needed to accomplish it, a killing, is truly evil.

I think that Dumbledore doesn't percieve giants, centaurs, merpeople, etc. as less than human, but equal. These creatures are similar to humans in that they feel. Therefore, what he sees repulsive is anything that doesn't feel, or rejects feelings.

I agree. We don't have any specific religious framework in HP. I think Rowling is aiming for a message that, while inspired by her own specific Christian beliefs, has the potential of universal appeal. So, we don't have the sorts of explanations real-life theologians like. But I would guess that all the magical creatures in her world who are capable of rational thought, human-like emotion, and the making of ethical choices, also have souls.

They are all born with 'whole and untarnished' souls, and if they do things (evil things) which tarnish, damage, or even split their souls, this dimishes them. Dumbledore would not want his for himself, or for everyone else. On the contrary, he seems saddened by evil in others. (I found this very striking in his interview with Tom Riddle in "Lord Voldemort's Request").

Here's something I've been thinking about today. Why is splitting your soul so repulsive to Dumbledore? Are we to understand that Dumbledore is religious, even though religion in so many words doesn't appear in the Harry Potter books? In our world if you believe in the soul it is a metaphorical part of our being which is eternal and continues after death. But in the Harry Potter world a soul is a physical thing that can be removed, torn up and even locked inside an artifact. For a wordly man like Dumbledore who befriends giants, muggles and centaurs, why is it so distasteful to him to become less than human?

Thoughts? :)
Because a whole human soul is the embodiment of the "spirit" of a person. I think the books make clear the idea that if the soul is torn through murder, or especially mutilated in order to achieve immortality, then the person as a whole becomes "less human." That's not to say they become more like a House Elf or a MerMan, but just more animalistic and their spirit is "diminished.

I'm sure Dumbledore would say that a House Elf with a complete soul was better than Voldemort with even one horcrux.

A centaur with a "good spirit" - which we see in Firenze in Book One - is vastly superior to the horrible creature Quirrelmort which was drinking the unicorn blood. The unicorn is "pure and defenseless" and the curse connected to killing one gives the slayer a "cursed life, a half-life." Firenze still knows right from wrong, and while there may be "lesser" souls than his among the centaurs who might have killed, all of them are probably superior to Quirrelmort at that moment.

Dumbledore refers to people who make even one horcrux as the "ordinary evil." In other words, man has always wanted to be immortal somehow, and making a horcrux is an evil way to do it.

But death is natural and happens to everyone, and to fight that is to be less than human.

So when Dumbledore is judging Voldemort he is comparing him to Harry, with his more innocent and whole soul, and not saying he is more like a MerPerson or House Elf. I think Dumbledore is comparing Voldemort to other humans alone.

I think the thing that made me in love with DD was in SS/PS, when Harry asks him what he would see in the Mirror of Erised and he responds that he would see himself with new socks, because nobody ever gives him anything other than books. That sort of sweet sadness permeates his character repetitively throughout the series, so while I fully enjoy his light-hearted side, the reason that DD, for me, is such a great character is the side of him that is only revealed in glances.
DD, obviously, is the brains of the book. And nobody sees him as anything other than that. People come to DD for advice, protection, and knowledge... but rarely is DD thought of in the caring way that other characters are thought of. Harry pities Sirius for bring so isolated in Gimmauld Place, and misses the fact that DD's genious isolates him so extremely. Everyone does. That heart-wrenching and completely understated pain in DD's life is what makes him so utterly loveable because he is light-hearted and silly and willing to help others when he gets so little in return. Once you realize this undertone in the book concerning his character, it becomes so obvious that DD has a part of him that is utterly empty, and that part is almost completely overshadowed by his silliness and wisdom. That contrast appeals so much more to those around him and to the reader than the undertone of a longing that is presented so gently.
Honestly, only in HBP did I see DD get the sort of appreciation he wanted--not for his brains or for his wisdom or extensive knowledge, but for himself as a person. And it brought him to tears. We see his feelings for Harry so blatantly in OotP when he reveals his "mistake" of loving Harry too much, and that sentiment isn't really returned until HBP...and even then not completely. Harry feels awkward when DD becomes emotional; he does not see DD as emotional, he sees him as a source (albeit an invaluable source, but nevertheless, his ultimate protector and source of knowledge and not necessarily someone who he loves the way that DD had loved him).
DD is utterly bittersweet for me, and I think it is that bittersweet feeling that makes you feel a tremendous loss after his death that goes above and beyond the feeling of "Oh, ****, Harry isn't safe anymore!" or "What now? We have nowhere to get information!" It hurts deeper than that because JKR planted a subtle aspect of DD in our minds--DD as a man beyond his achievements and humor.
Harry remembers DD's "idea of a few words", something silly about DD, but for me DD was more powerful in the moments when he reveals that emptiness inside of him..his longing for a true friend, a true family member, and a true companion.
Just some thoughts that have been mulling around. Anyone else see this in him?
(I'm not putting down Harry at all, so don't take it that way. I do not think anyone is to blame for DD's loneliness and Harry was the closest to puncturing that boundry.)

I think we all sense that there are surely things about Dumbledore he has never shared with Harry, and that he has an oddball sense of humor.

Among these things, it is my belief that Dumbledore actually was the inventor of two commercial products in the wizarding world, and hid a sly clue in their names:

Drooble's Best Blowing Gum (wrappers given to Neville by Alice Longbottom)
Dr. Ubbly's Oblivious Unction (used on Ron's "brain" scars In OOTP)

Among other links, both products and Dumbledore's name contain the word "double."

I can see Dumbledore getting a kick out of launching these products under an assumed name; and in the case of the gum, we know from his choice of passwords that he is fond of sweets.

OK, tell me this is nuts.

So when Dumbledore is judging Voldemort he is comparing him to Harry, with his more innocent and whole soul, and not saying he is more like a MerPerson or House Elf. I think Dumbledore is comparing Voldemort to other humans alone.

I'm not disputing this at all, because I think you're actually right on this point...ish, I suspect that Dumbledore is comparing Voldemort to Harry in particular and not to anyone else. We know all the parallels. I think it's Dumbledore's way of highlighting to Harry the pitfalls of bad choices.....

I think we all sense that there are surely things about Dumbledore he has never shared with Harry, and that he has an oddball sense of humor.

Among these things, it is my belief that Dumbledore actually was the inventor of two commercial products in the wizarding world, and hid a sly clue in their names:

Drooble's Best Blowing Gum (wrappers given to Neville by Alice Longbottom)
Dr. Ubbly's Oblivious Unction (used on Ron's "brain" scars In OOTP)

Among other links, both products and Dumbledore's name contain the word "double."

I can see Dumbledore getting a kick out of launching these products under an assumed name; and in the case of the gum, we know from his choice of passwords that he is fond of sweets.

OK, tell me this is nuts.

:lol: I kind of like it. It sounds like a very Dumbledore-ish thing to do, though after Voldemort returned, he wouldn't have as much time on his hands to run a business. :(

This is such a great thread. The analyses of Dumbledore's character and principles are fascinating.

Just had another thought on Dumbledore/Drooble/Dr. Ubbly....

Is it possible that Dumbledore is an assumed name, or that the family changed its name at some point?

It's so frustrating that JKR reportedly has said that Dumbledore's family would be a profitable line of inquiry, yet there is so very little to go on.

Perhaps she means his only living relative (as far as we know): Aberforth. Aberforth sees a lot of shady characters, so maybe he, like Dung, has dealing with the underground.

Oh dear, I realise I am going to get some hate mail about this, but I believe Dumbledore had some huge faults.

He had favourites. Just think of the disappointment of the students in the other houses when he started handing out points at the end of Philosopher's stone.

Why did he NEVER TRUST Harry with the most vital information of all -- WHY he trusted Snape.

And, by far the most unforgiveable part of all -- why did he abandon -- yes abandon -- Harry during the Order of the Phoenix. When Harry needed him most of all he wouldn't even look at him. We know why, but Harry didn't. Surely he could have handed him a note -- anything, to ease Harry's mind.


I love Dumbledore, but I wish he was a bit more grounded while he was with us. Harry has a lot to learn. How will he find out, now, on his own. If Dumbledore had told him about Snape (good guy, I believe) Harry would have an ally on his journey.

Oh dear, I realise I am going to get some hate mail about this, but I believe Dumbledore had some huge faults.

If you do get flames, I have some water handy. You can feel however you like. And Dumbledore definitely was not infallible. No one is.


He had favourites. Just think of the disappointment of the students in the other houses when he started handing out points at the end of Philosopher's stone.

:agree: Word. I don't think it was so much the handing out of extra points as it was the fact that the whole thing was very public and took place after the official numbers had come out that was unfair. Dumbledore could have quietly added the points during one of the days Harry was unconscious in the hospital wing. No humiliation. Before official tallies.
As it was, the Slytherins were celebrating a victory they worked for, and then were publically deflated by the Headmaster of the school....

Gah, sorry for ranting, that part always gets my goat. :grumble:


Why did he NEVER TRUST Harry with the most vital information of all -- WHY he trusted Snape.

That, as Dumbledore said to Harry, is a matter between the two of them. IMO, it's sort of like asking a psychiatrist about a patient of theirs. They can't say, because whatever is under wraps is a) deeply personal and b) confidential.


And, by far the most unforgiveable part of all -- why did he abandon -- yes abandon -- Harry during the Order of the Phoenix. When Harry needed him most of all he wouldn't even look at him. We know why, but Harry didn't. Surely he could have handed him a note -- anything, to ease Harry's mind.

Aha, but that would be falling for the same trap Dumbledore admits to falling into-- caring too much for Harry's happiness, and not enough for the common good. As Dumbledore said, he didn't want Voldemort (who was using his newfound HarryVision) to see that they were friendly, as LV would use that to his advantage (like with Sirius).
I do agree though, that Dumbledore could have tried to do something. Something very subtle perhaps....I mean, not looking at Harry is going a bit too far. If I were LV, I'd be suspicious that eye contact was not being made.
I do hope Dumbledore considered all his options, as he's wont to do.


I love Dumbledore, but I wish he was a bit more grounded while he was with us. Harry has a lot to learn. How will he find out, now, on his own. If Dumbledore had told him about Snape (good guy, I believe) Harry would have an ally on his journey.

Juuuuust wait....what you believe may come to pass, and sooner than you think....*pulls out crystal ball* ;)

I love Dumbledore, but I wish he was a bit more grounded while he was with us. Harry has a lot to learn. How will he find out, now, on his own. If Dumbledore had told him about Snape (good guy, I believe) Harry would have an ally on his journey.


One of three things is true:
1) Snape is a traitor. In that case, Dumbledore was wrong about him, and his mistake was not failing to communicate his reasons to Harry, but trusting Snape in the first place.
2) Snape is trustworthy, and killed Dumbledore as part of some sort of plan. In this case, I can't imagine that Dumbledore did not leave behind some evidence of Snape's innocence and trustworthiness, which will be revealed to Harry and us in due time. (Right when Harry needs Snape in DH, I would imagine). I would not call any of this a mistake.
3) Snape is trustworthy, and killed Dumbledore because of the Catch-22 situation he and Dumbledore found themselves in at the end of HBP. In that case, Dumbledore's failure to tell Harry more about Snape seems reasonable. He had been keeping Snape's role in the Prophecy from Harry, I imagine because he feared it would poison that relationship further (as indeed it did when it came out). When Harry discovered it on his own, he was not in a receptive mood, and Dumbledore was eager to go get the Horcrux. Dumbledore seemed to consider telling Harry at the end of HBP - I think he decided to put it off until Harry was calmer. Oops.

completly offbase and i'm don't believe it, but i was reading through some name orgins and came across fawkes

Fawkes (Dumbledore's phoenix) - Guy Fawkes was an English Catholic who, in 1605, tried to blow up the House of Parliament as an act of rebellion against the new Protestant government. In England, November 5th is now known as "Guy Fawkes Day" (or "Bonfire Night") where Guy Fawkes is burned in effigy. Every year he is resurrected to burn again. It can also be noted that he is known as one of the most infamous traitors in English history.

other then the obvious rising from ashes to burn anew thing, why whould dumbledore pick the name of britians greatest traitor to name his pheonix after....maybe theres more toalbus than meets the eye....

sorry just popped into my head after reading it, lol like i said, i really don't believe this but i just had to bring it up.

Thankyou ignisia and zgirnius, for not blasting my ideas into the ether, and clearing up some points for me.

What I really don't get is right at the beginning of OOTP, when Harry is on trial -- it seems to him almost on trial for his life, after all, if he is found guilty he would have no home -- Hogwarts -- no permission to be a wizard -- the only thing that he has loved during these troublesome years -- no hope. Dumbledore turns up at the trial, and Harry must think -- thank goodness, someone believes me, believes IN me. But Dumbledore won't even look at him. This is BEFORE all the bits with Harry seeing the snake attack Mr Weasley. Why does Dumbledore do this? He surely at this time does not think that Voldemort has access to Harry's mind?

I still find Dumbledore, er, how can I say this -- really almost horrid in OOTP.

At the end (of OOTP) he apologises. Too late I say. If I was Harry I could have done with more support and less "you don't need to know" ish-ness.

ginger1, I had the same reaction. One of his "correspondingly huge" mistakes, I suppose.

He seems to have chosen a very isolated path for his life. As a wizard he has no peer. As headmaster, he has no one with whom he really "lets his hair down," others leaning heavily on him, no one for him to lean on. Only the rarest touch of pathos behind his humor, as with the socks, a real caring for his students and a rigorous respect for all, but careful to make no favorites, never allowed to have anyone close to him except Fawkes, who is wonderful but is not human.

He's also been involved in intelligence and counter-intelligence activites against Voldemort and maybe Voldemort's predecessor too. That's why he is always compartmentalizing things, sharing this with one person and that with another, and is apparently never able to "let go."

Perhaps somebody had to take these roles, but few would be able to bear it for long. He must have had a natural self-sufficiency in his character that grew even more with time and heavy responsibilities.

He imagined others in and around the Order were more like him than was in fact the case. He seriously underestimated Harry's need for human (we won't count the Dursleys) contact, involvement and support in OOTP, when Harry had just been through a dreadfully traumatic experience and was in the worst throes of adolescence as well. He underestimated Sirius's emotional needs in the same way. I think Professor McGonegall is sometimes quite frustrated in that he keeps even her rather conspicuously at arm's length.

I wonder if we'll get to hear more about his role in the earlier wars.

i believe the reason dumbledore didn't tell harry things he need to know goes back to the old saying "age discriminates against youth" didn't he say harry was not ready for the knowledge? unfortunatly, it is not his mind that would have to process the info so he didn't really know if harry was ready or not.

completly offbase and i'm don't believe it, but i was reading through some name orgins and came across fawkes

Fawkes (Dumbledore's phoenix) - Guy Fawkes was an English Catholic who, in 1605, tried to blow up the House of Parliament as an act of rebellion against the new Protestant government. In England, November 5th is now known as "Guy Fawkes Day" (or "Bonfire Night") where Guy Fawkes is burned in effigy. Every year he is resurrected to burn again. It can also be noted that he is known as one of the most infamous traitors in English history.

other then the obvious rising from ashes to burn anew thing, why whould dumbledore pick the name of britians greatest traitor to name his pheonix after....maybe theres more toalbus than meets the eye....

sorry just popped into my head after reading it, lol like i said, i really don't believe this but i just had to bring it up.

Nah, no problem!! I've been wondering why he did that as well... :lol:

completly offbase and i'm don't believe it, but i was reading through some name orgins and came across fawkes

Fawkes (Dumbledore's phoenix) - Guy Fawkes was an English Catholic who, in 1605, tried to blow up the House of Parliament as an act of rebellion against the new Protestant government. In England, November 5th is now known as "Guy Fawkes Day" (or "Bonfire Night") where Guy Fawkes is burned in effigy. Every year he is resurrected to burn again. It can also be noted that he is known as one of the most infamous traitors in English history.

other then the obvious rising from ashes to burn anew thing, why whould dumbledore pick the name of britians greatest traitor to name his pheonix after....maybe theres more toalbus than meets the eye....

sorry just popped into my head after reading it, lol like i said, i really don't believe this but i just had to bring it up.

Not so crazy. Some think Snape and Fawkes are one in the same - either a human who can transfigure into a bird or one really clever bird that can transfigure into a human. I do think there is some connetion there but won't know until book 7...

A question for Acorn7 -- you said "some think Snape and fawkes are one and the same" and I nearly leapt out of my skin.

Is there a thread on this? Has anyone ever found out if they are ever in the same room together?

It is something that has been hovering in the back of my mind somewhere, and I would love to read any other ideas about it.

Many thanks for jolting this to the front of my mind...

you said "some think Snape and fawkes are one and the same" and I nearly leapt out of my skin. Is there a thread on this?
It doesn't seem like this thread is about this particular theory specifically, but it might be the place to post about such a theory.
fawkes and snape v2 (http://cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=91726&highlight=snape+fawkes)

Not so crazy. Some think Snape and Fawkes are one in the same - either a human who can transfigure into a bird or one really clever bird that can transfigure into a human. I do think there is some connetion there but won't know until book 7... I thought that they were too, I did a thread about that quite awhile ago.

I always found Dumbledore's life to be a little tragic. Obviously we don't know anything about his parentage, however we do know that the wizarding world looked to Dumbledore for support, they looked to Dumbledore for strength. Dumbledore was a great man that the entire wizarding world admired or feared. However he seemed to be a lonely man, Jo told us he never found an equal and so I take that to mean he never found love, although he understands its powers greatly, I wonder if he has ever felt them himself.

Fawkesfan1 you said you had a thread about Fawkes and Snape a while ago. Did it ever come to any conclusions?

I am keen on the idea that as Harry knows and trusts Fawkes he may listen if information is given to him by Fawkes regarding Snape's loyalty.

I can't see any other way of getting info to Harry. There's DD's portrait, perhaps the pensive -- but if Fawkes turns up, Harry will take notice.

(Hopefully)

Fawkesfan1 you said you had a thread about Fawkes and Snape a while ago. Did it ever come to any conclusions?

I am keen on the idea that as Harry knows and trusts Fawkes he may listen if information is given to him by Fawkes regarding Snape's loyalty.

I can't see any other way of getting info to Harry. There's DD's portrait, perhaps the pensive -- but if Fawkes turns up, Harry will take notice.

(Hopefully)

Yes it did... that due to the timeline, there was no way he could have been Fawkes... but since there are some similarities between the two that maybe just maybe JK did that on purpose in order to (poss.) show that Snape's on the side of the Order.

So am I, it makes the most sense and it would probably be the best way of convincing Harry on which side that Snape is on ;).

Thankyou, Fawkesfan1

I have great hopes for the phoenix being a vital character in DH.

He has been around for so long, and has been an important element of many of the sub-plots of the stories, wherever Dumbledore is (was) you felt Fawkes was with him. And his importance came to the fore on several occasions -- I sincerely hope he soars into the very first chapter of DH, and gives Harry some comfort, some hope, and some information!

I can't believe that no one one on this thread has thought of Dumbledore for such a long time (dead and forgotten?) -- February 20th I last posted, and no more opinions?

OK, a question -- do you think Dumbledore died believing he had given Harry enough information to carry on with his task / journey?

do you think Dumbledore died believing he had given Harry enough information to carry on with his task / journey?
ooh, good questions. On one hand, Dumbledore spent the better part of the year giving Harry essential information. But, and this is big but, Dumbledore probably saw himself as keeping his role of advisor throughout the war against Voldemort. Besides, Dumbledore, with his incredible genius and experience could never have relayed everything needed to defeat Voldemort, but he may have felt that the most important bits, if not all of them.

There are a few things Dumbledore would have wanted to share with Harry. How to destroy a horcrux and what locations were already checked by Dumbledore. Does Harry need to check the orphanage? It would be most welcome for Harry if he knows what other locations Dumbledore thought were used by Voldemort to hide his horcruxes.

And I think that Dumbledore gathered that Harry did not quit grasp the love as power thing. He would have wanted to expand on that.

Dumbledore spent his last year with Harry trying to make Harry understand the person Voldermort is, by understanding him, Harry has all he needs to vanquish Voldemort.
Harry already destroyed a horcrux, without any prompting, he instictively knew what to do.
I can't agree with the Harry doesn't understand the power of love statement, when Voldemort tried to possess Harry in the fountain at the end of book five, it was Harry's love for Sirius that prevented Voldemort from being able to possess him.
I also feel theat we may have been blind sided by the power of love option where Voldemort is concerned, true, Voldemort does not understand the basis of love, however I don't feel that that will be his downfall, what
Dumbledore helped Harry understand is, Voldemort fears death above all else, he sees it as a human weakness, Harry doesn't fear death at all.
By destroying his soul, Voldemort has by default destroyed his ability to exist in any form. When all of Voldemorts horcruxes are destroyed, and his human body killed, Voldemort will cease to exist.

Thankyou, Fawkesfan1

I have great hopes for the phoenix being a vital character in DH.

He has been around for so long, and has been an important element of many of the sub-plots of the stories, wherever Dumbledore is (was) you felt Fawkes was with him. And his importance came to the fore on several occasions -- I sincerely hope he soars into the very first chapter of DH, and gives Harry some comfort, some hope, and some information!

I was re-reading TCoS the other day, and I came across something very interesting that I had forgotten, Dumbledore was the transfiguration teacher before beconing headmaster. I think Dumbledore may have been able to transform, and I think his animal of choice was a phoenix?? any thoughts??

Well, you really can't choose your Animagus form. Like a wand, the form chooses the wizard. If not, everyone would become bald eagles and lions. :lol:
But the phoenix does sound very Dumbledore. While he won't literally rise from the ashes, he does live on in our hearts. :)
Yes, that was sappy. :lol:

I think you can pick which animal you can transform into, I do believe it's your patronus you can't choose!!

:shrug: Hm...I just took a look at the page on Animagi on the HPL. I didn't find the answer (I was skimming :rolleyes:), but there is this quote from JKR:

Q: If you were an Animagus, what kind of animal would you be?
A: I'd like to be an otter - that's my favourite animal. It would be depressing if I turned out to be a slug or something.

"Turned out to be" seems to imply that she'd have no choice...

Maybe I'm a purist, I work on a theory, if it's not specified in the book, then the information does not exist, and I have never seen anything in the books to imply that you can't choose the animal you wish to transform into, James Sirius and Peter spacifically chose the types of animals they would change into, based on their need to control Lupin, and gain access to the Shrieking Shack by way of the Whomping willow, there was nothing accidental about their choices.
Harry's patronus on the other hand materalised in the shape of his faters animagis, that could imply hearts desire, as when Tonk's patronus changed shape between book 5 and 6, it became a large animal, perhaps a wolf as we now know, she was in love and pining for Lupin?? any thoughts?

Interesting....As the Patronus also symbolises that which watches over you, those two could usually go hand in hand assuming it's a loved one who watches over you.

Turning this in Dumbledore's direction, any thoughts on what his patronus might be? It's fun entertaining thoughts as to what it could be, though if I mentioned them, I'd probably be tarred and feathered. :rotfl:

Turning this in Dumbledore's direction, any thoughts on what his patronus might be? It's fun entertaining thoughts as to what it could be, though if I mentioned them, I'd probably be tarred and feathered. :rotfl:

Interview canon: it is a Phoenix. (From this page (http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/news_view.cfm?id=80)on her website).

What form does Dumbledore’s Patronus take?

Good question. Can anyone guess? You have had a clue. There was a little whisper there. It is a phoenix, which is very representative of Dumbledore for reasons that I am sure you can guess.

We don't know that Dumbledore IS an Animagus. ;)

There is only ont thing it could be, isn't there?!

Thanks zg! ^_^; I guess I got a bit carried away in Speculation Land.

Maybe I'm a purist, I work on a theory, if it's not specified in the book, then the information does not exist, and I have never seen anything in the books to imply that you can't choose the animal you wish to transform into,Generally, information Jo gives in interviews is also considered canon.
kelly_holland: When you turn into an Animagus, can you choose what animal you become? Or does this get "assigned" to you?

JK Rowling replies -> No, you can't choose. You become the animal that suits you best. Imagine the humiliation when you finally transform after years of study and find that you most closely resemble a warthog.What I haven't found is any reference to magical animagus form like the phoenix. All the known animagi seem to be of ordinary (Muggle world) creatures: stag, rat, cat, dog, beetle.

I was reading book 2 the other day, and it said that Dumbledore was the transfiguration master at the time Tom Riddle was a student, I had completley forgotten that, that led me to speculate on whether he could transform into something else, and if he could what could it be, which led to another thought, when the marble tomb surrounded Dumbledores body, something was seen to rise into the air from it.

Not everybody who reads the books has access to the interviews, so to play fair, I stick to what's writen in the books.

Dumbledore seemed much more, how shall i say it - vibrant, in the first book. i get this impression from the "Nitwit! Blubber! Oddment! Tweak!" quotation. Perhaps JKR just changed her mind about the way she wrote him, but he certainly seems less wakey in later books. He also doesn't sing the school song again, altough JkR has said it just hasnt been appropriate.

I was reading book 2 the other day, and it said that Dumbledore was the transfiguration master at the time Tom Riddle was a student, I had completley forgotten that, that led me to speculate on whether he could transform into something else, and if he could what could it be, which led to another thought, when the marble tomb surrounded Dumbledores body, something was seen to rise into the air from it.
One thought on personal transfiguration is Dumbledore's comment from PS:

"I don't need a cloak to become invisible," said Dumbledore gently.

If a wizard can learn to transform into an animal, perhaps they can also learn to become invisible at will. It seems like another form of transfiguration, which could be developed with time and plenty of practise. In the Ministry battle at the end of OotP, Voldemort seems to vanish for a few moments before he possesses Harry. Perhaps he can also become invisible at will. I think in the books so far we have only brushed on the possibilities of wandless, thought controlled magic, like apparition and the animagus transformation.



Dumbledore seemed much more, how shall i say it - vibrant, in the first book. i get this impression from the "Nitwit! Blubber! Oddment! Tweak!" quotation. Perhaps JKR just changed her mind about the way she wrote him, but he certainly seems less wakey in later books. He also doesn't sing the school song again, altough JkR has said it just hasnt been appropriate.
I know what you mean :) But there are still a few odd comments later in the series, like the knitting patterns in HBP :lol: Those comments are just Dumbledore's sense of humour. I think as the days get darker over the series there are fewer moments when Dumbledore would feel like expressing humour.

I know what you mean :) But there are still a few odd comments later in the series, like the knitting patterns in HBP :lol: Those comments are just Dumbledore's sense of humour. I think as the days get darker over the series there are fewer moments when Dumbledore would feel like expressing humour.

I think those moments are written in there to add some sense of humanity to the character; Dumbledore always looked so 'superior', as if he wasn't a real human being... So I guess those 'silly' comments makes him more credible as a human... :)

I think those moments are written in there to add some sense of humanity to the character; Dumbledore always looked so 'superior', as if he wasn't a real human being... So I guess those 'silly' comments makes him more credible as a human... :)
I agree with that. The thing about Dumbledore in PS, we're seeing him from the point of view of an eleven-year-old who, until then, has had no decent adult role models. Some of the 'superiority' we perceive early on is just Harry's respectful attitude and awe at this famous Wizard who has taken him under his wing. The scene in front of the Mirror of Erised shows Dumbledore in 'mentor mode', educating Harry in his own way. The instinctive teaching side of Dumbledore's personality is shown for the first time here.

One thought on personal transfiguration is Dumbledore's comment from PS:

"I don't need a cloak to become invisible," said Dumbledore gently.

If a wizard can learn to transform into an animal, perhaps they can also learn to become invisible at will. It seems like another form of transfiguration, which could be developed with time and plenty of practise.

Another idea - if he is an ANimagus, and his form is a Demiguise (the magical creature whose hairs are woven to make Invisibility Cloaks, a fact mentioned in FBA***T).

Another idea - if he is an ANimagus, and his form is a Demiguise (the magical creature whose hairs are woven to make Invisibility Cloaks, a fact mentioned in FBA***T).
I've thought about that idea before, because it solves the question of his invisibility so nicely. The problem for me is JKR says a person's animagus form suits their personality (AOL chat, 2000), and I don't see much similarity between Dumbledore's personality and the demiguise. It has long silvery hair but that's only one physical characteristic which they share.

Maybe I just don't want Dumbledore to be a giant ape :p

Here's what Fantasic Beasts says about the Demiguise

The Demiguise is found in the Far East, though only with great difficulty, for the beast is able to make itself invisible when threatened, and can be seen only by wizards skilled in its capture. The Demiguise is a peaceful herbivorous beast, something like a graceful ape in appearance, with large black doleful eyes more often than not hidden by its hair. The whole bdy is covered with a long, fine, silky, silvery hair. Demiguise pelts are highly valued as the hair may be spun into Invisibility Cloaks.

The long hair and peaceful nature point to Dumbledore, but some of the other qualities...er...don't.

Can a powerful wizard like Dumbledore transfomer into multiple different animals?

I wouldn't think so. Dumbledore may be powerful, but he's not that powerful!

Anamagous transformation possible. We'll probably never know.
What I want to know is: What made Dumbledore so good? Think about it. No one is born a complete chiorboy (Give all contradictory responses you want, its in general reality). So what made Dumbledore fight so hard for what is essence the "greater good"
What is the backstory? Here are some possible reasons I have come up with:
1. He lost someone (boring, but who?)
2. He was on the Dark side and redeemed. (There has to be a reason he knows so much Dark Magic no one good studies that stuff intensely without stimulus)
3. Someone he knew turned to the Dark Side. (Again, the Dark Magic thing)
My purposes for these questions are to find out 1. Why Dumbledore knows so much dark Magic. (My source is Binns, CoS.)2. Why doesn't he use it? You don't learn something and not use it unless you've had a bad experience. Please Respond.

Anamagous transformation possible. We'll probably never know.
What I want to know is: What made Dumbledore so good? Think about it. No one is born a complete chiorboy (Give all contradictory responses you want, its in general reality). So what made Dumbledore fight so hard for what is essence the "greater good"
What is the backstory? Here are some possible reasons I have come up with:
1. He lost someone (boring, but who?)
2. He was on the Dark side and redeemed. (There has to be a reason he knows so much Dark Magic no one good studies that stuff intensely without stimulus)
3. Someone he knew turned to the Dark Side. (Again, the Dark Magic thing)
My purposes for these questions are to find out 1. Why Dumbledore knows so much dark Magic. (My source is Binns, CoS.)2. Why doesn't he use it? You don't learn something and not use it unless you've had a bad experience. Please Respond.
I'll try my best to respond :)

I agree that no one is born that good, though I'd say that the way a person is raised will influence them a lot. But with Dumbledore we have the perfect control subject in his brother Aberforth, who, assuming he is the Hog's Head barman, appears to be everything Albus was not. So to consider your points.

1. He lost someone (boring, but who?)
Maybe it's a bit predictable, but it would make Dumbledore's relationship with Harry more poignant if they shared a similar loss. Whatever loss that was hasn't affected Aberforth in the same way, so perhaps it was a close friend or even Dumbledore's wife who died. JKR said in the Mugglenet/Leaky interview that Dumbledore has no equal, no soul-mate:
(Dumbledore's) wisdom has isolated him, and I think you can see that in the books, because where is his equal, where is his confidante, where is his partner? He has none of those things. (link (http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2005/0705-tlc_mugglenet-anelli-1.htm))
I think it's possible that his soul-mate was killed, and that's why he was so alone.


2. He was on the Dark side and redeemed. (There has to be a reason he knows so much Dark Magic no one good studies that stuff intensely without stimulus)
But Dumbledore did have a reason to study the dark side. He first defeated Grindelwald in 1945, and if he knew nothing about the dark arts before then (unlikely) he surely would by the time he'd got rid of the Dark Wizard. Also, many people have speculated that Grindelwald had a Horcrux, so to defeat him Dumbledore must have destroyed the Horcrux first. And to do that takes knowledge of the Dark Side. It's exactly the same knowledge that Harry needs before he can try to destroy Voldemort. If Dumbledore hadn't studied Voldemort and learnt his ways, Harry would be totally in the dark now without a chance. I think knowledge of the enemy is essential for victory. But knowing about a thing and using it are completely different.


3. Someone he knew turned to the Dark Side. (Again, the Dark Magic thing)
Quite a lot of people he knew joined the dark side, including all of the Death Eaters whom Dumbledore knew as his students at Hogwarts. I don't see that that would make Dumbledore more likely to wipe them out. I think, knowing Dumbledore's personality as we do, if a good friend had turned to Voldemort Dumbledore would rather try to bring them back, than try to kill them.

I really think Dumbledore was good through and through, and that's just the way he was :)