Albus Dumbledore: Manipulator

[Voldemorts8thHorcrux]

I never saw Harry as very powerful magically or much of an actual hero. Yes, he is above average in magical skill and has a saving people thing, but most of what he does is luck. in book one, his mom saved him, nothing to do with what he does. Dumbledore saved him from Quirrel. the obstacles (except for the key finding one) were mostly solved because of Ron and Hermione. In CoS, the basilisk and the sword was definitely some talent, the fact that he was a true Gryffindor, but the major reason he did all he did in CoS was because he just happened to know parseltongue. in PoA, that was the first time i saw true heroism and magical talent in him, because he did all that stuff with a patronus. Then there is GoF. That was when I felt Harry was at his least heroic times. His entire triwizard tournament was completely done by fake moody. i have to give some credit, his quidditch flying was good and he did practice a lot, but i feel that some of the things he did were relatively simple. Anyone can eat Gillyweed. If he was the one who knew it, sure, but it was only because of Dobby and Crouch. the third task was much better, but the magic he did didn't really seem too advanced. In the graveyard, i felt Harry really got lucky. the wand thing seemed completely out of the blue, well there was some forshadowing, but still. In book 5, that was probably the most good, heroic, skillful part of Harry's life before age 17. In HBP, I really didn't see much come out of him. the whole cave thing was kind of a sucess because of Dumbledore. This is the part i like Dumbledore the most. It is the time he really really trusts harry before his death. In DH, I felt most of it was luck, but there were a few key moments. I thought the Gringotts part was the part that Harry had his biggest moment. I didn't like the Hogwarts part. I felt it was more of luck. However, DH also seemed to me the part that Harry was the most manipulated. Harry wanted to do everything Dumbledore wanted. It was kind of cool, but still.

[CoeurDeLyon]

Originally Posted by Voldemorts8thHorcrux

I never saw Harry as very powerful magically or much of an actual hero. Yes, he is above average in magical skill and has a saving people thing, but most of what he does is luck. .

Oh I disagree.
A hero is a man of distinguished courage or ability, admired for his brave deeds and noble qualities.
IMO Harry was immensely courageous. He was willing to die for his friends. He may not have been a bookworm or the best to recite lines from books hes read, but he fits the exact definition of hero to me. He was also brave. And he never asked for anything in return. He just wanted a normal life. Dumbledore may have put the puzzle together, if I may say so, but that doesnt take away the fact that he isnt a hero and not jsut a puppet.

[PrezLeefun]

Did somebody say Harry Potter as a Puppet?





Ok seriously..... Harry rose to the occasion.

Dumbledore may have thrown Harry on the stage but Harry choose to perform.

[leah49]

I read Rowling's quote, but I just don't see Harry as a puppet. A lot of the things he did was on his own without Dumbledore guiding him. Yes, Dumbledore was basically guiding Harry to his death, but there are so many things he did on his own accord.

[xraydude]

Yes, Harry is a hero despite Dumbledore holding his strings. JKR's characterization of Harry as Dumbledore's puppet is more a critique of Dumbledore than Harry. By extension, a lot of people were acting based upon Dumbledor's string pulling, Harry was not alone in this.

I think that Dumbledore filled two roles (at least) in his relationship with Harry. As a kind, grandfather like figure, showing compassion and concern for Harry. As a General directing his troops, though, he gave Harry and others only enough information to put them in a position to successfully forward his strategic vision which was the downfall of Voldemort. His concern and love for Harry was genuine, as was his desire to sharpen and shape Harry into the weapon that was needed to destroy the evil that was LV. Harry was a hero because of his bravery, loyalty and compassion for others. Dumbledore may have pulled the strings, but it does not at all take away from what Harry did.

So, no, it doesn't ruin it for me. Actually, I find it a wonderful addition to the depth of Dumbledore's character. It made him seem much more human.

[Wright1771]

Ever since Philosopher's Stone, Dumbledore has been letting out the string, little by little for Harry to follow. He wasn't showing him what to do, he was letting Harry find his own strengths.

[Yoana]

Originally Posted by Starrlight

If the author of a series describes the hero as a puppet--is the hero really a hero?

Yes, because he had a choice and everything he did, he chose to do.

[snuka]

Harry can't know the real plan due to LV Legilimency and their mental connection and of course Snape lost any chance of revealing the truth after he killed DD, but why not members from the Order and his no.2 in command McGonagall ?

After he became a portrait, in that summer after the end of HBP and the funeral, he could explain everything to McGonagall and they could have secretly worked together with Snape. It's not like LV is going to know since Snape is a great Occlumens, and the rest of the teachers are safe at Hogwarts. There wasn't a spy like Pettigrew this time - so what stopped him ?

[Yoana]

As Aberforth sad, Albus learned secrecy at his mother's knee, and he was a natural.

[meesha1971]

Originally Posted by Voldemorts8thHorcrux

I never saw Harry as very powerful magically or much of an actual hero. Yes, he is above average in magical skill and has a saving people thing, but most of what he does is luck. in book one, his mom saved him, nothing to do with what he does. Dumbledore saved him from Quirrel. the obstacles (except for the key finding one) were mostly solved because of Ron and Hermione. In CoS, the basilisk and the sword was definitely some talent, the fact that he was a true Gryffindor, but the major reason he did all he did in CoS was because he just happened to know parseltongue. in PoA, that was the first time i saw true heroism and magical talent in him, because he did all that stuff with a patronus. Then there is GoF. That was when I felt Harry was at his least heroic times. His entire triwizard tournament was completely done by fake moody. i have to give some credit, his quidditch flying was good and he did practice a lot, but i feel that some of the things he did were relatively simple. Anyone can eat Gillyweed. If he was the one who knew it, sure, but it was only because of Dobby and Crouch. the third task was much better, but the magic he did didn't really seem too advanced. In the graveyard, i felt Harry really got lucky. the wand thing seemed completely out of the blue, well there was some forshadowing, but still. In book 5, that was probably the most good, heroic, skillful part of Harry's life before age 17. In HBP, I really didn't see much come out of him. the whole cave thing was kind of a sucess because of Dumbledore. This is the part i like Dumbledore the most. It is the time he really really trusts harry before his death. In DH, I felt most of it was luck, but there were a few key moments. I thought the Gringotts part was the part that Harry had his biggest moment. I didn't like the Hogwarts part. I felt it was more of luck. However, DH also seemed to me the part that Harry was the most manipulated. Harry wanted to do everything Dumbledore wanted. It was kind of cool, but still.

I think that is a large part of the problem myself. We were led to believe that Dumbledore was this eccentric, wise old man who had Harry's best interests at heart. In the end, we discover that the only thing Dumbledore truly cared about was the end result. Even so, he developed a very poor strategy overall. He did not adequately prepare Harry for what he was about to face. He withheld vital information from Harry. He did not leave Harry the means to find out what he needed to know in order to succeed.

In the end, Harry succeeds because of a series of events that occurred through blind luck and pure chance. Dumbledore's machinations were essentially pointless and provided Harry little to no help at all because Harry was not able to figure any of it out on the basis of what Dumbledore had given him. As a mentor, Dumbledore failed. As a strategist, Dumbledore failed. He pulled strings, he manipulated, he let innocent people be tortured and murdered, and he never learned anything from his past mistakes. That was disappointing and caused me to lose a lot of respect for Dumbledore.

However, I do view Harry as a true hero because he was able to overcome Dumbledore's failures and succeed. He was a puppet, but he did eventually break the strings and he did succeed on his own. He had to. If he had relied solely on Dumbledore, he would most certainly have failed. But that is what was really disappointing about DH. The relationship between Dumbledore as the mentor and Harry as the hero should have been something that actually helped Harry. Instead it turned out to be something that held Harry back, hindered his efforts, and would have brought about failure if Harry had followed the path Dumbledore set him on. But it was disappointing and very poorly written overall because, in the end, it was primarily blind luck that brought about Harry's success.

[Blast_ended]

Albus just wasn't the type that would go tell his secrets to everyone. He needed one people to pass the truth to harry when the time will come. He choose Snape. He had no reason to tell Mcgonagall.

Originally Posted by meesha1971

I think that is a large part of the problem myself. We were led to believe that Dumbledore was this eccentric, wise old man who had Harry's best interests at heart. In the end, we discover that the only thing Dumbledore truly cared about was the end result. Even so, he developed a very poor strategy overall. He did not adequately prepare Harry for what he was about to face. He withheld vital information from Harry. He did not leave Harry the means to find out what he needed to know in order to succeed.

In the end, Harry succeeds because of a series of events that occurred through blind luck and pure chance. Dumbledore's machinations were essentially pointless and provided Harry little to no help at all because Harry was not able to figure any of it out on the basis of what Dumbledore had given him. As a mentor, Dumbledore failed. As a strategist, Dumbledore failed. He pulled strings, he manipulated, he let innocent people be tortured and murdered, and he never learned anything from his past mistakes. That was disappointing and caused me to lose a lot of respect for Dumbledore.

However, I do view Harry as a true hero because he was able to overcome Dumbledore's failures and succeed. He was a puppet, but he did eventually break the strings and he did succeed on his own. He had to. If he had relied solely on Dumbledore, he would most certainly have failed. But that is what was really disappointing about DH. The relationship between Dumbledore as the mentor and Harry as the hero should have been something that actually helped Harry. Instead it turned out to be something that held Harry back, hindered his efforts, and would have brought about failure if Harry had followed the path Dumbledore set him on. But it was disappointing and very poorly written overall because, in the end, it was primarily blind luck that brought about Harry's success.

I do not agree with you. Dumbledore strategy never failed; his strategy was brilliant from the beginning to the end. In fact, the only part in Hallows that Dumbledore never planned is the Elder Wand - which he wanted to vanish it's powers when he dies - came to Harry, but that turned out to be helpful too.

If you look at it in a pure strategy look, Dumbledore plan with Snape was brilliant. Snape was his puppet too; He was a skilled wizard and yet he had a weakness: his love for lily, his feelings of guilt for her death. Dumbledore manipulated him like a master, turned Snape against LV, used him as a spy until the very end, and then send him to his own nearly sure death (Dumbledore knew LV will look for the EW, and knew that after Snape will kill him - LV will probably think Snape is the master of the wand). In the way, he turned snape into a murder (although we don't know wheter Snape murdered anyway before Dumbledore). He used Snape to give Harry the sword, he used him all the way through like a chess pawn, moved all around the game, until the player sacrifice him in the sake of another goal (killing the Elder Wand powers, in this case).

His plan with Harry was brilliant too. He gave him all the information he needed to know about the Horcruxes, told him about the prophecy to make sure he knows that he'll be the one to destroy voldemort, gave him a lot of valuable clues, but at the same time let Harry do everything alone; If Dumbledore would have helped Harry all the time, what would Harry have learned? nothing. It was essential that Harry will do all this on his own, in order to give him the strengh to do what he must do, to fulfill his final goal - walk to his own death. As Snape so brilliantly put it - he was raising him like a pig for slaughter.

No, after all what bothers me is not Dumbledore strategy but Dumbledore lack of morality. Harry, for example, will never have approved a plan that will cause the death of a friend, like Dumbledore did, no matter what greater good this plan will serve. That is the difference between them.

[snuka]

AsI posted before in another thread, I can understand young Dumbledore being tempted by the Hallows, and working with Grindelwald.

I dislike him not being honest with Harry about his real plan (despite him saying "I will tell you everything"), manipulating Snape and not doing anything on the Harry-Snape relationship (even before Legilimency was an issue), and lastly, Harry had to clean up his own Hallows mess.

It makes you wonder whether he really cared for Harry, I was disturbed by the cold "This is touching...have you come to care for the boy?" line in contrast to Snape - of all people - being upset about Harry having to die.

[SusanBones]

Originally Posted by Blast_ended

No, after all what bothers me is not Dumbledore strategy but Dumbledore lack of morality. Harry, for example, will never have approved a plan that will cause the death of a friend, like Dumbledore did, no matter what greater good this plan will serve. That is the difference between them.

This is how I feel, too. Dumbledore manipulated more people than just Harry. I believe he used Snape's weakness, love for Lily and remorse over his role in her death, to manipulate him. I was thinking about Dumbledore and Harry throughout the first four books. It seems like, outside of the fact that Dumbledore placed Harry at the Dursley's house, he left Harry to his own devices until the graveyard scene in GoF. Dumbledore knew, early on, that Harry carried a piece of Voldemort's soul and would have to die to kill the soul piece. Once Dumbledore learns that Voldemort took Harry's blood to regenerate, he knew there was a chance Harry could make it through the ordeal alive. That is when, in my opinion, Dumbledore begins to really manipulate things. OotP is when we really see Dumbledore trying to control everything about Harry's life. No one is allowed to tell Harry anything, even Ron and Hermione. That is the beginning, in my opinion, of most of the manipulation.

[meesha1971]

Originally Posted by Blast_ended

Albus just wasn't the type that would go tell his secrets to everyone. He needed one people to pass the truth to harry when the time will come. He choose Snape. He had no reason to tell Mcgonagall.

That's part of the problem though. He chose Snape. And then he set a plan in motion that ensured that Harry would not trust Snape by ordering Snape to kill him. He had months to explain what was going on to Harry - to tell him that he was dying - to tell him about Voldemort's plan with Draco - to tell him what he had ordered Snape to do. But he didn't say anything.

Snape was a poor choice to begin with because there was such animosity between Harry and Snape. But allowing Harry to believe that Snape had murdered him in cold blood only added fuel to the fire.

I do not agree with you. Dumbledore strategy never failed; his strategy was brilliant from the beginning to the end. In fact, the only part in Hallows that Dumbledore never planned is the Elder Wand - which he wanted to vanish it's powers when he dies - came to Harry, but that turned out to be helpful too.

That is incorrect. The failure with the Elder wand was not the only failure. And while it worked out with Voldemort not being able to master the wand, that would have been true if Dumbledore's plan had worked as well. But with the failure, Harry will now have to spend the rest of his life worrying about defeat because of the Elder wand. It makes him a target and too many people heard him telling Voldemort why he couldn't master it.

But, it wasn't the only failure. Pretty much everything else was a failure to. It was luck that helped Harry succeed - not anything that Dumbledore did.

If you look at it in a pure strategy look, Dumbledore plan with Snape was brilliant. Snape was his puppet too; He was a skilled wizard and yet he had a weakness: his love for lily, his feelings of guilt for her death. Dumbledore manipulated him like a master, turned Snape against LV, used him as a spy until the very end, and then send him to his own nearly sure death (Dumbledore knew LV will look for the EW, and knew that after Snape will kill him - LV will probably think Snape is the master of the wand). In the way, he turned snape into a murder (although we don't know wheter Snape murdered anyway before Dumbledore). He used Snape to give Harry the sword, he used him all the way through like a chess pawn, moved all around the game, until the player sacrifice him in the sake of another goal (killing the Elder Wand powers, in this case).

Dumbledore did manipulate Snape - that is true. He also set Snape up to die because of the business with the Elder wand - and he never told Snape about that either. But it didn't actually help Harry all that much. Snape got Harry the sword, but that would have been useless if it had not been for the fact that Harry overheard that conversation in the forest where the Goblins talked about that sword. If Harry had not heard that conversation, he would never have known that the sword could be used to destroy a Horcrux. Just arranging for Harry to get the sword was both useless and pointless because Harry would not have known why and he had no way to figure that out with the information that Dumbledore had given him. That was Dumbledore's failure because he never bothered to tell Harry how to destroy a Horcrux or that the sword could be used. It was blind luck and pure chance that led to Harry finding out - not Dumbledore.

Even Harry being able to get those memories from Snape at the end was pure chance. If Harry had not gone down to the Shrieking Shack at that moment - if he had not revealed his presence to Snape - he never would have known what he had to do. That was also Dumbledore's failure because his actions ensured that Harry would not trust Snape. It was blind luck and pure chance that Harry made the decision to go there at that time and that he decided to reveal himself to Snape.

Too much relied on blind luck and pure chance. A good strategy would have ensured that Harry would get the information he needed rather than depending on luck to put Harry on the right path. Harry did not succeed because of what Dumbledore did. Harry succeeded because of a series of events that occurred through blind luck and pure chance.

His plan with Harry was brilliant too. He gave him all the information he needed to know about the Horcruxes, told him about the prophecy to make sure he knows that he'll be the one to destroy voldemort, gave him a lot of valuable clues, but at the same time let Harry do everything alone; If Dumbledore would have helped Harry all the time, what would Harry have learned? nothing. It was essential that Harry will do all this on his own, in order to give him the strengh to do what he must do, to fulfill his final goal - walk to his own death. As Snape so brilliantly put it - he was raising him like a pig for slaughter.

That is incorrect as well. Dumbledore did not give Harry all the information he needed. He told him what a Horcrux was and he speculated that Voldemort had made six Horcruxes. But he never told Harry how to destroy a Horcrux. Harry discovered that piece of information through blind luck and pure chance - not anything that Dumbledore did. The book that Hermione summoned - Dumbledore should have given that to Harry himself or at least left it for him in a place where he would be guaranteed to find it. Dumbledore should have told Harry that he could use the sword to destroy Horcruxes as well. Dumbledore did not tell Harry what he needed to know and he did not leave him any means of finding out. Harry found out through blind luck - not through anything that Dumbledore did.

This was not about Harry learning something on his own. It was Harry's life that Dumbledore was playing with and by withholding that vital information and not leaving Harry any clues that would allow him to figure it out, Dumbledore set Harry up to fail. The only reason Harry was able to succeed was because of blind luck - he just happened to overhear a conversation that led him to figuring out the sword could be used to destroy a Horcrux. Without overhearing that conversation, Harry might have gotten the sword, but he wouldn't have had a clue what to do with it.

No, after all what bothers me is not Dumbledore strategy but Dumbledore lack of morality. Harry, for example, will never have approved a plan that will cause the death of a friend, like Dumbledore did, no matter what greater good this plan will serve. That is the difference between them.

I agree with you on this point. The morality of it is very disturbing and the fact that Dumbledore put Harry through all of that - forcing him to live with neglect and abuse with the Dursleys, withholding vital information, forcing him to watch as Snape murdered him, not preparing him for that in advance or even through a letter for Harry to receive afterwards, essentially raising Harry to die - it was all very disappointing.

But it wasn't brilliant. I can't agree there. Dumbledore left too much of it to blind luck and pure chance. Dumbledore failed on both counts because it was a poor strategy that would have failed if not for blind luck and there was cruelty in it because of everything Harry was forced to go through. And so much of it was just unnecessary. Depending upon blind luck was not good strategy.

Originally Posted by SusanBones111

This is how I feel, too. Dumbledore manipulated more people than just Harry. I believe he used Snape's weakness, love for Lily and remorse over his role in her death, to manipulate him. I was thinking about Dumbledore and Harry throughout the first four books. It seems like, outside of the fact that Dumbledore placed Harry at the Dursley's house, he left Harry to his own devices until the graveyard scene in GoF. Dumbledore knew, early on, that Harry carried a piece of Voldemort's soul and would have to die to kill the soul piece. Once Dumbledore learns that Voldemort took Harry's blood to regenerate, he knew there was a chance Harry could make it through the ordeal alive. That is when, in my opinion, Dumbledore begins to really manipulate things. OotP is when we really see Dumbledore trying to control everything about Harry's life. No one is allowed to tell Harry anything, even Ron and Hermione. That is the beginning, in my opinion, of most of the manipulation.

I agree. I think Dumbledore was manipulating Harry all along though. Even the events of Harry's first year appear to be set up as a test for Harry - I always felt that the fact that all of those challenges in the dungeon specifically went towards a particular skill one of them had was suspicious.

But I agree that things really kicked into high gear in OOTP. But that also makes it even more of a disappointment because, at the end, Dumbledore admitted to Harry that he had been wrong and that he should have told him everything from the beginning. After that, I was sure that Dumbledore would not withhold information from Harry anymore. So finding out in DH that Dumbledore had not learned anything from his mistake and continued to withhold information from Harry was a huge disappointment. And the fact that he essentially lied to Harry - he did say he was going to tell him everything - caused me to lose a lot of respect for Dumbledore. He did admit he was wrong at the end of DH at ask for forgiveness - and that helps a little bit - but that was essentially a repeat of what happened at the end of OOTP.

That bothered me almost as much as Dumbledore's manipulation. As intelligent as Dumbledore was supposed to be, he never learned from any of his mistakes and continued making the same ones over and over again.

[MC2456]

Well, I just think that no-one is perfect. We've seen Albus Dumbledore's good side for too long. Sometimes, we also have to see the bad and the ugly. Manipulating people is over the limit, but don't you think Albus Dumbledore's 'goodness' has been over the limit too?

[meesha1971]

Originally Posted by MC2456

Well, I just think that no-one is perfect. We've seen Albus Dumbledore's good side for too long. Sometimes, we also have to see the bad and the ugly. Manipulating people is over the limit, but don't you think Albus Dumbledore's 'goodness' has been over the limit too?

I didn't. I felt that Jo had established a good balance there prior to DH - particularly with Dumbledore admitting to his mistakes at the end of OOTP and promising to tell Harry everything. He wasn't perfect. He wasn't all powerful or all knowing. He was human and capable of making mistakes. The revelations of his past could have added to that because he had his brush with "evil" in his youth. Dumbledore was supposed to be the epitome of goodness - the fact that he became the epitome of goodness because he had learned from his past mistakes would have been an excellent path to take with his character, IMO. For someone as intelligent as Dumbledore was supposed to be, he should have been capable of learning from his mistakes. It was disappointing to see that he never learned anything from his mistakes.

[anonymous4]

Perhaps this was discussed earlier and I missed it. But..

Did Dumbledore tell the Longbottoms about the Prophesy? Augusta and Neville know nothing about it. Did he decide that since he felt they weren't at risk they did not need to know about it. Did he feel it was to important a secret to share with them unless they had to know. This would be very arrogant of him to keep such a secret but he does decide things for other people at times. I assumed they knew but as I thought about it I realized there was no evidence in canon that they knew. We would have to base the issue on D's personality. What do you think?

[NRHP]

Originally Posted by meesha1971

That's part of the problem though. He chose Snape. And then he set a plan in motion that ensured that Harry would not trust Snape by ordering Snape to kill him. He had months to explain what was going on to Harry - to tell him that he was dying - to tell him about Voldemort's plan with Draco - to tell him what he had ordered Snape to do. But he didn't say anything.

Snape was a poor choice to begin with because there was such animosity between Harry and Snape. But allowing Harry to believe that Snape had murdered him in cold blood only added fuel to the fire.

Sorry, this is nonsense. Dumbledore could not tell Harry anything about Snape and his knowledge of Draco's plan because of Harry's connection to Voldemort's mind. If Voldemort had chosen to read Harry's mind as he did in OOtP, Snape would have been killed immediately and probably Draco as well. Also, Dumbledore had to keep his promise to Snape not to tell Harry the reason why Snape was working against Voldemort.

That is incorrect. The failure with the Elder wand was not the only failure. And while it worked out with Voldemort not being able to master the wand, that would have been true if Dumbledore's plan had worked as well. But with the failure, Harry will now have to spend the rest of his life worrying about defeat because of the Elder wand. It makes him a target and too many people heard him telling Voldemort why he couldn't master it.

But, it wasn't the only failure. Pretty much everything else was a failure to. It was luck that helped Harry succeed - not anything that Dumbledore did.

How do you get that impression? Giving Ron the deluminator worked out. Giving Hermione the Book of fairy tales worked out.

Dumbledore did manipulate Snape - that is true. He also set Snape up to die because of the business with the Elder wand - and he never told Snape about that either. But it didn't actually help Harry all that much. Snape got Harry the sword, but that would have been useless if it had not been for the fact that Harry overheard that conversation in the forest where the Goblins talked about that sword. If Harry had not heard that conversation, he would never have known that the sword could be used to destroy a Horcrux. Just arranging for Harry to get the sword was both useless and pointless because Harry would not have known why and he had no way to figure that out with the information that Dumbledore had given him. That was Dumbledore's failure because he never bothered to tell Harry how to destroy a Horcrux or that the sword could be used. It was blind luck and pure chance that led to Harry finding out - not Dumbledore.

Dumbledore did not setup Snape to die. How do you figure that? In order to foresee that Voldemort would kill Snape because of the Elder Wand, he would have had to foresee the whole chain of events that lead Voldemort first to seek the Elder Wand and then to the fact that Dumbledore was its last owner.

Even Harry being able to get those memories from Snape at the end was pure chance. If Harry had not gone down to the Shrieking Shack at that moment - if he had not revealed his presence to Snape - he never would have known what he had to do. That was also Dumbledore's failure because his actions ensured that Harry would not trust Snape. It was blind luck and pure chance that Harry made the decision to go there at that time and that he decided to reveal himself to Snape.

He had ordered Snape to tell Harry the truth as soon as the other Horcruxes were destroyed (without telling Snape the truth about Horcruxes). He could not foresee that this would be the moment Voldemort would kill Snape.

Dumbledore could not give Harry the reason Snape could be trusted because this would have ensured Snape's death if Voldemort had read Harry's mind.

Too much relied on blind luck and pure chance. A good strategy would have ensured that Harry would get the information he needed rather than depending on luck to put Harry on the right path. Harry did not succeed because of what Dumbledore did. Harry succeeded because of a series of events that occurred through blind luck and pure chance.

That is simply not true. Yes, they were also lucky, but it wasn't blind luck; they made their luck by being quick-thinking, brave and resourceful.

That is incorrect as well. Dumbledore did not give Harry all the information he needed. He told him what a Horcrux was and he speculated that Voldemort had made six Horcruxes. But he never told Harry how to destroy a Horcrux. Harry discovered that piece of information through blind luck and pure chance - not anything that Dumbledore did. The book that Hermione summoned - Dumbledore should have given that to Harry himself or at least left it for him in a place where he would be guaranteed to find it. Dumbledore should have told Harry that he could use the sword to destroy Horcruxes as well. Dumbledore did not tell Harry what he needed to know and he did not leave him any means of finding out. Harry found out through blind luck - not through anything that Dumbledore did.

No, he did find out through Hermione's research - and Dumbledore knew how clever Hermione is. That's why he told Harry to share his knowledge with his friends.

This was not about Harry learning something on his own. It was Harry's life that Dumbledore was playing with and by withholding that vital information and not leaving Harry any clues that would allow him to figure it out, Dumbledore set Harry up to fail. The only reason Harry was able to succeed was because of blind luck - he just happened to overhear a conversation that led him to figuring out the sword could be used to destroy a Horcrux. Without overhearing that conversation, Harry might have gotten the sword, but he wouldn't have had a clue what to do with it.

I agree with you on this point. The morality of it is very disturbing and the fact that Dumbledore put Harry through all of that - forcing him to live with neglect and abuse with the Dursleys, withholding vital information, forcing him to watch as Snape murdered him, not preparing him for that in advance or even through a letter for Harry to receive afterwards, essentially raising Harry to die - it was all very disappointing.

But it wasn't brilliant. I can't agree there. Dumbledore left too much of it to blind luck and pure chance. Dumbledore failed on both counts because it was a poor strategy that would have failed if not for blind luck and there was cruelty in it because of everything Harry was forced to go through. And so much of it was just unnecessary. Depending upon blind luck was not good strategy.

I agree. I think Dumbledore was manipulating Harry all along though. Even the events of Harry's first year appear to be set up as a test for Harry - I always felt that the fact that all of those challenges in the dungeon specifically went towards a particular skill one of them had was suspicious.

But I agree that things really kicked into high gear in OOTP. But that also makes it even more of a disappointment because, at the end, Dumbledore admitted to Harry that he had been wrong and that he should have told him everything from the beginning. After that, I was sure that Dumbledore would not withhold information from Harry anymore. So finding out in DH that Dumbledore had not learned anything from his mistake and continued to withhold information from Harry was a huge disappointment. And the fact that he essentially lied to Harry - he did say he was going to tell him everything - caused me to lose a lot of respect for Dumbledore. He did admit he was wrong at the end of DH at ask for forgiveness - and that helps a little bit - but that was essentially a repeat of what happened at the end of OOTP.

That bothered me almost as much as Dumbledore's manipulation. As intelligent as Dumbledore was supposed to be, he never learned from any of his mistakes and continued making the same ones over and over again.[/quote]

Dumbledore didn't depend on luck, he depended on the strengths of the trio and their supporters.

Originally Posted by anonymous4

Perhaps this was discussed earlier and I missed it. But..

Did Dumbledore tell the Longbottoms about the Prophesy? Augusta and Neville know nothing about it. Did he decide that since he felt they weren't at risk they did not need to know about it. Did he feel it was to important a secret to share with them unless they had to know. This would be very arrogant of him to keep such a secret but he does decide things for other people at times. I assumed they knew but as I thought about it I realized there was no evidence in canon that they knew. We would have to base the issue on D's personality. What do you think?

He didn't need to tell them. He knew the Potters would be Voldemorts target because Snape told him that.

[gertiekeddle]

Kind reminder:

Forum Rule #2a 2a. The goal of CoS Forums is to make sure everyone has a good time and can make friends. Obviously not everyone will agree with one another and we ask that you respect the opinions of others. Making sarcastic, or rude remarks directed at another member, or attacking others for holding views different to your own will not be tolerated. If you see this taking place, please report it to an Unspeakable.

Please make sure to voice your critiques in a respectful manner. Thanks!

[meesha1971]

Originally Posted by NRHP

Sorry, this is nonsense. Dumbledore could not tell Harry anything about Snape and his knowledge of Draco's plan because of Harry's connection to Voldemort's mind. If Voldemort had chosen to read Harry's mind as he did in OOtP, Snape would have been killed immediately and probably Draco as well. Also, Dumbledore had to keep his promise to Snape not to tell Harry the reason why Snape was working against Voldemort.

That is incorrect. Dumbledore himself said that the connection was no longer an issue because Voldemort feared it - he said that to Snape in the memories that Harry saw. That was why he felt safe in telling Harry about Horcruxes and giving him that quest in the first place. And he was right. Voldemort never used the connection after what happened in OOTP.

Dumbledore did not have to tell Harry the reason - and he was not at liberty to do so. But he should have told Harry what was going on and the plans for his Death so Harry would know that he could trust Snape. There was no reason for him not to.

How do you get that impression? Giving Ron the deluminator worked out. Giving Hermione the Book of fairy tales worked out.

Through chance and luck - not because Dumbledore explained anything or left them anything to help them figure it out. Ron didn't know he could use the deluminator to find Harry and Hermione after he left - if Hermione hadn't said his name that night, he wouldn't have figured it out. It was pure chance and blind luck.

Hermione never would have figured out why Dumbledore left her the book of fairly tales on her own - or even with Harry and Ron. It was a series of events that happened by chance that led to them figuring it out. Krum telling Harry about Xenophilius Lovegood's pendant being Grindelwalds mark and seeing that mark on the gravestone. Without those two events, they never would have figured out why Dumbledore gave Hermione that book. Dumbledore did not have anything to do with that - it was pure chance and blind luck.

Dumbledore did not setup Snape to die. How do you figure that? In order to foresee that Voldemort would kill Snape because of the Elder Wand, he would have had to foresee the whole chain of events that lead Voldemort first to seek the Elder Wand and then to the fact that Dumbledore was its last owner.

And he did. That was explained on page as well. Dumbledore intended for his death to break the power of the wand because he knew that Voldemort would eventually seek the wand. He wanted Voldemort to believe that Snape was the master of the wand. But he never bothered to mention any of that to Snape. Dumbledore knew that Snape would most likely be killed because Voldemort would believe he was the master of the Elder wand.

He had ordered Snape to tell Harry the truth as soon as the other Horcruxes were destroyed (without telling Snape the truth about Horcruxes). He could not foresee that this would be the moment Voldemort would kill Snape.

That's pretty much the point. He set the events in motion that guaranteed that Harry would not trust Snape. He left Snape no way to get that information to Harry because there was no way Harry would ever have listened to anything Snape had to say.

It was pure chance and blind luck that put Harry in the right place at the right time to get those memories.

That is simply not true. Yes, they were also lucky, but it wasn't blind luck; they made their luck by being quick-thinking, brave and resourceful.

It wasn't quick thinking, bravery, or resourcefulness that led to Krum telling Harry about Grindelwald's mark - that was blind luck. It wasn't any of those things that caused them to overhear the conversation in the woods that led to them figuring out the sword could be used to destroy Horcruxes - that was also blind luck. It wasn't any of those things that prompted Hermione to say Ron's name that night - it was just blind luck.

The trio most definitely did very well once they managed to acquire the information they needed. But the fact remains, they were forced to rely on blind luck and pure chance to get that information because Dumbledore did not give it to them or give them any means of getting it.

No, he did find out through Hermione's research - and Dumbledore knew how clever Hermione is. That's why he told Harry to share his knowledge with his friends.

Hermione's research revealed that basilisk venom could be used to destroy a Horcrux. That information was useless to them because none of them had access to a basilisk. It came in handy when they got back to Hogwarts at the end, but that didn't do them any good when they had the locket but no knowledge of how they could destroy it without access to basilisk venom.

And Hermione's research was also acquired through blind luck because she just happened to consider attempting to summon a book on Horcruxes before leaving Hogwarts - which was definitely a deux ex machina. Dumbledore should have given Harry that book or left it for him somewhere where Harry would be guaranteed to find it.

The information that they needed - that Dumbledore should have given Harry - was the fact that the sword could be used to destroy a Horcrux. And they never would have figured that out if they had not overheard that conversation in the forest - blind luck and pure chance.

Dumbledore didn't depend on luck, he depended on the strengths of the trio and their supporters.

No, he didn't actually. He did not give them the information they needed. Nor did he provide any means for them to get that information. They got that information through blind luck and pure chance.

The fact is, Dumbledore could not have known that Krum would be at Bill and Fleur's wedding or that he would tell Harry about Grindelwald's mark. Nor could he have known that Hermione would see the mark on that gravestone. Nor could he have known that some goblins would go into hiding and have a conversation with humans in a place where Harry could overhear it. Nor could he have known that Hermione would attempt to summon a book from the headmasters office before leaving Hogwarts. It was those events that led to Harry getting the information he needed - and Dumbledore didn't have anything to do with any of those things. They all happened because of blind luck and pure chance.