Albus Dumbledore: Character Analysis v2

[eliza101]

Originally Posted by wickedwickedboy

Yes I know, but Dumbledore lied to them. Big, Major lies that cost or could have cost some of them their lives. Only Dumbledore knew he was lying and thus he was the only one who could do the right thing and take himself off the job.

When leaders are on the job they have to look at the big picture. A leader can't base a strategy on how few people will be killed. He can't allow himself to think of the casualty count. If he does, he may be a nice kind guy, but he is not a leader in a war. Leaders know that there is always a price to be paid in lives. When you are a soldier in an action, you know you may die. That's the price you pay when you fight a tyrant. It's either accept it or accept LV telling you how to live your life.

[The_Green_Woods]

More like Dumbledore told them partial truths; he gave them half the puzzle. But the point was no one ever doubted him. They could have been dis-satisfied with what they got from Dumbeldore; Sirius for example could have fought against Dumbledore's ruling of telling Harry the Prophecy; Arthur Weasley and Moody could asked McGonagal to approach DD's portrait and ask him about why he had forbidden Harry and Co. not to say anything about their task?

But they did not; they accepted Dumbeldore IMO.

Dumbledore, was working as the leader; he cannot look for Harry alone; he was entrusted with winning the war, that involves completely different tactics. In fact Dumbledore should not have said that he was willing to sacrifice many people if Harry could live. I find that more offensive and immoral than his plans for Harry.

As a leader his job is to win the war and in a war, he has to take some very tough decisions. That's what he did I think; his only weakness, where he was unfair was to Harry (positively, because he wanted Harry to live at any cost) and Snape (negatively, because he sent him to death deliberately IMO and did not twll Snape or acknowledge his sacrifice later IMO).

ETA :: Eliza101, I agree mostly, except I think Dumbledore tried to keep the casualty count as low as possible as any good leader would do.

[wickedwickedboy]

Originally Posted by eliza101

When leaders are on the job they have to look at the big picture. A leader can't base a strategy on how few people will be killed. He can't allow himself to think of the casualty count. If he does, he may be a nice kind guy, but he is not a leader in a war. Leaders know that there is always a price to be paid in lives. When you are a soldier in an action, you know you may die. That's the price you pay when you fight a tyrant. It's either accept it or accept LV telling you how to live your life.

I agree. However, I feel that all leaders that do not tell people the truth about the possibility or propability of their death as a soldier cannot use the excuse that they are "looking at the big picture" to justify their actions. My feeling on this is: Harry was Dumbledore's "ace in the hole" and Dumbledore planned for him to die. Harry should have been aware of that. Voldemort was almost certain to kill Snape, believing him to be master of the Elder Wand and Dumbledore knew of that high probability too; he should have disclosed that to Snape. Dumbledore set up the 7 Potters ordeal and betrayed the Order, resulting in Moody's death. That went beyond what any good leader should do, in my judgment, because one does not plan betrayal of one's own men. In that case, no one can figure out exactly why he did it either, so there is not even a good reason for it.

Knowing you may die in the course of a war is one thing; having your leader plan for your death in that war is another altogether. We are not talking about casualties here - we are talking about betrayal of your own people. That is not a part of the job description of a good leader in my opinion.

[The_Green_Woods]

Originally Posted by wickedwickedboy

Knowing you may die in the course of a war is one thing; having your leader plan for your death in that war is another altogether. We are not talking about casualties here - we are talking about betrayal of your own people. That is not a part of the job description of a good leader in my opinion.

I agree with this for Snape (though I suppose you meant it for Harry or am I wrong?).

Dumbledore said that "It was my intention" that Snape should end up with the elder wand. He was deliberately sending Snape to his death; I would be okay wiyth it, if only he had told Snape, but I suppose he could not take the chance Snape may refuse, then all his plans would come to a stand still IMO.

Though I have thought of a way, improbable though it may sound, that Snape actually knew about the Elder Wand; that is Dumbeldore told him about the consequences of killing him and about the death stick as well and Snape agreed to sacrifice his life for Harry Potter and the Light.

Will post that in the Snape/Dumbledore thread, if I can make it look coherent.

-------------------------
Another point that struck me about DD :: Dumbledore could understand parseltongue (he could understand what the Gaunts were speaking in HBP) so I presume he knew Parseltongue. Why did he not try and open the Chamber? Did he not know where the entrance was or did he not try and find out at all?

[wickedwickedboy]

Originally Posted by The_Green_Woods

I agree with this for Snape (though I suppose you meant it for Harry or am I wrong?).

I was referring to 7 Potters, but it applies to Snape also. So both are correct.

Dumbledore said that "It was my intention" that Snape should end up with the elder wand. He was deliberately sending Snape to his death; I would be okay wiyth it, if only he had told Snape, but I suppose he could not take the chance Snape may refuse, then all his plans would come to a stand still IMO.

Dumbledore was like playing god in a way, but from his point of view, it was 'for the greater good', so he just justified it that way, but from my point of view, it was just wrong.

Though I have thought of a way, improbable though it may sound, that Snape actually knew about the Elder Wand; that is Dumbeldore told him about the consequences of killing him and about the death stick as well and Snape agreed to sacrifice his life for Harry Potter and the Light.

Will post that in the Snape/Dumbledore thread, if I can make it look coherent.

Well this has been suggested before and discussed as well. While there are many points of evidence I won't go into here; suffice it to say that the biggest reason I don't believe this is true is because JKR would have showed us. There was no reason for her to keep that a secret if it were true. It just makes Dumbledore look worse for no reason at all. Of course Dumbledore likely felt that there was a possibility that Snape might survive and even if it was only a 1% chance, he could tell himself that he wasn't actually sending Snape off to his death. But I am not so generous in my opinion of that. .

Another point that struck me about DD :: Dumbledore could understand parseltongue (he could understand what the Gaunts were speaking in HBP) so I presume he knew Parseltongue. Why did he not try and open the Chamber? Did he not know where the entrance was or did he not try and find out at all?

Well that is an old plot hole discussion. Remember too that many at Hogwarts thought that it was all just a myth, that the chamber did not really exist. We don't know if Dumbledore believed it was a myth or not - if he did, then there is no plot hole because he would not search for it. But if he believed it existed - or might exist, then yeah, he should have searched the entire castle, top to bottom, and I would believe he'd find it, like the trio did.

[The_Green_Woods]

Originally Posted by wickedwickedboy

I was referring to 7 Potters, but it applies to Snape also. So both are correct.

I still feel that the 7 Potters was to make Voldemort and Harry meet, so that Voldemort could start off on the EW. had Voldemort and Harry not met in the 7 Potters, I think Dumbeldore would have engineered another meeting.

Dumbledore was like playing god in a way, but from his point of view, it was 'for the greater good', so he just justified it that way, but from my point of view, it was just wrong.

As a leader, what else could he do? In fact he slips as the leader on 2 known counts IMO. One was when he tells Harry that he was willing to sacrifice any number of lives if it meant Harry would live and two was when he planned for the transfer of the EW in such a way that Voldmeort would firmly believe that he was its Master, when in reality he would not be. That transfer needed Snape's death and Dumbeldore planned it without Snape's knowledge, knowing full well that by killing him, Snape will have to die as well IMO.

Well this has been suggested before and discussed as well. While there are many points of evidence I won't go into here; suffice it to say that the biggest reason I don't believe this is true is because JKR would have showed us. There was no reason for her to keep that a secret if it were true. It just makes Dumbledore look worse for no reason at all. Of course Dumbledore likely felt that there was a possibility that Snape might survive and even if it was only a 1% chance, he could tell himself that he wasn't actually sending Snape off to his death. But I am not so generous in my opinion of that. .

I am not very generous either, but posting in the Snape thread yesterday, something struck me and that's why I said I'll post if it makes sense. I also think there was no % of chance that Snape would survive. The moment he killed Dumbeldore, his own countdown to death had begun IMO.

Well that is an old plot hole discussion. Remember too that many at Hogwarts thought that it was all just a myth, that the chamber did not really exist. We don't know if Dumbledore believed it was a myth or not - if he did, then there is no plot hole because he would not search for it. But if he believed it existed - or might exist, then yeah, he should have searched the entire castle, top to bottom, and I would believe he'd find it, like the trio did

Well, Dumbeldore when bringing Colin Creevy to the infirmary told McGonagall (I think it was) that the Chamber was indeed open, he seemed to believe very much both in the existence of a chamber and a monster inside it. perhaps he even knew it was a basilisk.

If he believed in the existence of the chamber, I wonder why he never searched for it. If the Trio could find it, then OI presume Dumbeldore could have as well.

[MasterOfDeath]

Just because Dumbledore could understand Parceltounge doesn't mean he could speak it.

Also, you have to remember that only the Heir of Slytherin could open the Chamber. Ginny had a piece of Riddle in the diary, Harry had the piece of soul within him and Ron had the cup.

[The_Green_Woods]

Originally Posted by MasterOfDeath

Just because Dumbledore could understand Parceltounge doesn't mean he could speak it.

Also, you have to remember that only the Heir of Slytherin could open the Chamber. Ginny had a piece of Riddle in the diary, Harry had the piece of soul within him and Ron had the cup.

Ron, without any knowledge of Parseltongue whatsoever was able to open the Chamber. Dumbeldore knew Parseltongue.

This is a great point about the heir of Slytherin being the only one able to open the Chamber. But Ron had the cup with him, unlike Harry and Ginny who had the soul inside them.

I never thought of it, because Hagrid was accused of opening the Chamber (which made me feel that anyone with a knowledge of parseltongue could) and killing Moaning Myrtle and he was no Heir of Slytherin IMO.

If Dumbledore could not open the door then as Headmaster he could have at least found the door to the chamber and then could have heavily warded it so that who ever was opening the chamber and letting the monster out would find it impossible to open the chamber even with parseltongue or be caught while trying to open the chamber IMO.

[MasterOfDeath]

Originally Posted by The_Green_Woods

Ron, without any knowledge of Parseltongue whatsoever was able to open the Chamber. Dumbeldore knew Parseltongue.

This is a great point about the heir of Slytherin being the only one able to open the Chamber. But Ron had the cup with him, unlike Harry and Ginny who had the soul inside them.

I never thought of it, because Hagrid was accused of opening the Chamber (which made me feel that anyone with a knowledge of parseltongue could) and killing Moaning Myrtle and he was no Heir of Slytherin IMO.

If Dumbledore could not open the door then as Headmaster he could have at least found the door to the chamber and then could have heavily warded it so that who ever was opening the chamber and letting the monster out would find it impossible to open the chamber even with parseltongue or be caught while trying to open the chamber IMO.

I have a feeling the official story was that Hagrid let loose a giant spider that killed Moaning Mrtyle and that it had nothing to do with the COS. Even if there were rumors about the chamber of secrets being opened. Remember how Draco said his father told him that the chamber was opened 50 years ago but wouldn't tell him who opened it? If people thought it was Hagrid then Draco would think it was Hagrid too wouldn't he?

Secondly, even if Dumbledore did find the entrance to the chamber, he couldn't open it. I don't think he did though. It was in a very unassuming place: a girl's bathroom.

I thought the legend went that only the heir could open the chamber? What else would be the point of Slytherin leaving behind a chamber if any of the current headmasters could open it?

I think only the heir of Slytherin could open the chamber and since Ron and Ginny had the horcruxes, the chamber would magically sense the presence of Tom Riddle through his pieces of soul and open.

I don't think anyone could just go up to the sink and imitate parceltounge and open the chamber. I think it only worked because Ron had the cup in his possession which contained a piece of Tom Riddle's soul who is the rightful heir of Slytherin and can open the chamber.

That's how I interpreted it.

[The_Green_Woods]

Originally Posted by MasterOfDeath

I have a feeling the official story was that Hagrid let loose a giant spider that killed Moaning Mrtyle and that it had nothing to do with the COS. Even if there were rumors about the chamber of secrets being opened. Remember how Draco said his father told him that the chamber was opened 50 years ago but wouldn't tell him who opened it? If people thought it was Hagrid then Draco would think it was Hagrid too wouldn't he?

Aragog - CoS But that was years ago,' said Aragog fretfully. "Years and years ago. I remember it well.That's why they made him leave the School.They believed that I was the monster that dwells in what they called the Chamber of Secrets. They thought Hagrid had opened the Chmaber and set me free.'

Secondly, even if Dumbledore did find the entrance to the chamber, he couldn't open it. I don't think he did though. It was in a very unassuming place: a girl's bathroom.

If only the Heir of Slytherin could open it and I think what you said was correct, Dumbledore could have still searched for the entrance to the Chamber and warded it, even if it would not give him entry.

He was a teacher when Myrtle died and I am sure he would have enquired Myrtle about her death very throughly when he realised she had become a ghost, instead of passing on.

I thought the legend went that only the heir could open the chamber?

Yes, that's what Binns says.

I think only the heir of Slytherin could open the chamber and since Ron and Ginny had the horcruxes, the chamber would magically sense the presence of Tom Riddle through his pieces of soul and open.

While I agree about Ginny and Harry, because everytime they spoke Parseltongue it was actually Voldemort's presence inside them that made them do it, I am doubtful about Ron, because he speaks Parseltongue. Not helped by Voldemort's soul in the cup IMO.

This is why I thought Dumbeldore would also be able to. And Hermione a muggleborn student was also able to go into the chamber, though that could be because the doors were already open IMO.

[persian85033]

But Dumbledore would KNOW that there was a Chamber of Secrets, even if everyone else thought it was a legend. Wasn't he a teacher when it happened? And he knew Myrtle was the one who died?

[The_Green_Woods]

Originally Posted by persian85033

But Dumbledore would KNOW that there was a Chamber of Secrets, even if everyone else thought it was a legend. Wasn't he a teacher when it happened? And he knew Myrtle was the one who died?

He would know all of the things you have mentioned. And yet the whole of second year, until he was removed by Lucius Malfoy, we don't see anything in canon to say he even tried looking for the Chamber.

But I think he knew about the Chamber and the location too I feel, because he would have spoken to Mrytle when she died, and that was when Tom Riddle was a student. And he may have guessed about the monster as well, for Mrytle talks about big yellow eyes and then she says she died.

Perhaps he tried to get inside, or perhaps he could not find the entrance, but he does know about the Chamber and the most telling evidence of that is how the bathroom is abandoned for all those years. Dumbeldore IMO would have known or at least guessed.

[wickedwickedboy]

Good point. He had to have known it was not a myth. However, perhaps he could not get inside because he did not pertain to Slytherin in any way and didn't realize if he merely had something of theirs (like the cup), he would be able to get inside. Kind of shabby . But I haven't read it in so many years, there may be something I am not remembering. I will ask in little questions; Hedwig Owl will remember.

[The_Green_Woods]

He could have at the very least warded the whole sink or placed revealing spells so that he would have known who it was, who could enter the Chamber and release the monster within.

[NoNEWTS]

I've been going back and reading a thread that existed before DH, namely Is it possible Dumbledore was evil?. I refused to click on this at the time since I didn't want to know anyone's foul theory. In retrospect I felt like the one being presented to Harry at the wedding: Don't let anything tarnish your memory of Dumbledore.

Now we know better, and I'm curious what people said. So far nearly all echo my attitude at the time: NO WAY. Some people said they'd burn their books if he was ever evil. I wonder how many went through with that. So far the first clever comment was

Originally Posted by Zina_xO

he obviously wasn't after defeating Grindewald and destroying tidbits of Voldie's soul.

Here's a comment after quoting JKR interview statements about his name meaning "white and goodness", phoenix song being good, etc:

Originally Posted by Spirit

I think it's obvious that Dumbledore wasn't ever evil. The "epitome of goodness" could never have been evil.

Here's a keen interpretation:

Originally Posted by dohertypipedown

I was intrigued by the pleading that Dumbledore was doing upon the rocks upon the green lake as he drank the potion. I do not have the text on me, but some of the begging he was doing was highly suggestive that he had done some harmful things in his life and deeply regreted them

I had thought he was envisioning kids at Hogwarts being tortured by Voldemort, since we all thought he was really good. I like this one:

Originally Posted by Nivek_Rotcor

Evil likes to control. Voldemort wants to control. Dumbledore was supported by some to be the M.O.M. If he was evil and wanted control he would have taken the postition and not stayed at Hogwarts.

Here's an "of two minds" comment:

Originally Posted by rigdoctorbri

No, he is not evil today, nor do I believe that he ever was. That being said, now I will play devil's advocate.
Dumbledore has shown us that he often disregards or bends the rules, and may overlook indescretions of people....
He grows to manhood, and does a terrible deed; something that he has always regretted, but perhaps has learned to accept as part of his past; water under the bridge. However, this single act caused him to change his ways. He straightens his life out, and goes on to become the great wizard all know him to be.

Close:

Originally Posted by Wimsey

If this were true, ... , when people ask why Dumbledore gives second chances, they would point to the fact that Dumbledore himself is a prodigal son of some sort.

Good thought, bad writing:

Originally Posted by AccioBroom

MAYBE!!! i think that he mit have concdered of being the the most powerfulest wizard in the world,when he was a kid. SO he could take the world over and be under it' control! But somthing changed his mind like he looked up to Godrick Gryffindor,he was his HERO!!!!!!!!

Here's a fine comment on page 13:

Originally Posted by Mahleindayre

Yeah, maybe when he was younger, and got all Oustanding's on his OWLS and NEWTS, he was a little over confident, and accidentally hurt/killed someone with a miscasted spell? I am much more obliged to believe that if he did something evil, it was an accident rather than on purpose.

[MrSleepyHead]

Originally Posted by NoNEWTS

Now we know better, and I'm curious what people said. So far nearly all echo my attitude at the time: NO WAY. Some people said they'd burn their books if he was ever evil. I wonder how many went through with that.

I cannot agree that Dumbledore was ever "evil". He was overconfident, arrogant, dabbled in what some may call Dark ideas, etc. However, I would not label any of his actions, as an adolescent or a century-old man, "evil." If the word is being used as a synonym for "bad" or "wrong," I will concede, but an "evil" person, to me, does more than simply plan immoral deeds. If he put those plans into action and cause destruction or widespread hurt, I would think about linking Dumbledore to the word. However, while he (and I) think the ideas he formed were evil, I do not think it makes his person truly evil.

[wickedwickedboy]

...archives crack me up. I read a little of them all the time and it is great that so many people guess so many of the little things correctly. Even some of the incorrect guesses were very good though.

Dumbledore wasn't evil, imo. He behaved in a manipulative and in the case of Harry, a despicable manner, at times. He was also arrogant in the extreme, imo, even after his death in Kings Cross - which would be fine and even admirable to me if it was only with respect to true claims, but I feel he was arrogant with respect to false claims as well which was inappropriate. However, his heart was in the right place and he had a lot of compassion and kindness for others. Dumbledore stumbled when it came to the "means" to achieve his ends, imo, and in that light, he was very much like Slytherins were described by the sorting hat to me. He could behave in a cold and calculating manner and be quite dispassionate at times. The thing was, he fully recognized he was behaving in a wrongful manner and even appeared to have remorse for that fact as he carried out his less than stellar means. He seemed to move forward under the rule: it is easier to gain forgiveness than get permission. Indeed he did request forgiveness where possible and he also expressed remorse where that was not possible - at least for most things. I could totally relate to his being construed as a "lesser evil" being rather than a "good one", but that still would keep him out of the pure evil category, imo.

It is very difficult for me to forgive Dumbledore for his wrongs though; mostly because he did them purposefully, knowing they were wrong. Perhaps, even though he was very wise, he was simply incapable of doing better - and there is some canon to back up that idea in that he told Harry that Harry was a far better man than he could ever be (which was entirely true, imo.) So perhaps there was some mental disfunction associated with his character that he was unable to overcome without help and/or a lot of work. However, he lived to a very old age, so that hardly serves to justify his not correcting it if that was the case, imo. Harry forgave Dumbledore for his indirect mistreatment of him; but I believe it would have been relatively simple to do because Dumbledore truly had loved him and shown him that love to the best of his ability. He'd also shared his wisdom and provided Harry with a very good example of how not to be in certain respects. He also had worked to try and ensure Harry's survival in addition to planning to ensure his meeting the potentially deadly confrontation forefold in the prophecy. Finally, Dumbledore did confess and request forgiveness for those wrongs he'd done. So I see Harry's forgiveness as justified - but I am not Harry and I cannot be so forgiving from the outside looking in. So Dumbledore is still a rather "grey" character for me.

[eaglestreasure]

Originally Posted by MrSleepyHead

I cannot agree that Dumbledore was ever "evil". He was overconfident, arrogant, dabbled in what some may call Dark ideas, etc. However, I would not label any of his actions, as an adolescent or a century-old man, "evil." If the word is being used as a synonym for "bad" or "wrong," I will concede, but an "evil" person, to me, does more than simply plan immoral deeds. If he put those plans into action and cause destruction or widespread hurt, I would think about linking Dumbledore to the word. However, while he (and I) think the ideas he formed were evil, I do not think it makes his person truly evil.

He was kind of manipulative towards Harry, but he knew it had to be done, at that it was for the Greater Good. Only for real this time.

I don't think he ever dabbled into the Dark Arts, as Rita Skeeter no doubt told everyone. I don't think he ever truly formed any evil ideas, really, though. I don't see how they were this way.

He wanted to subject Muggles to Wizard control. This is obviously not a happy thing, nor was it noble, but it wasn't really evil in my book, because he saw the wrong and made up for it. It was his way of thinking to get attention and power; all his Hogwarts life, he's been told how smart he is, and everyone thought he was going to waste just sitting at home. What a better way to get recognition? But, firstly, I think these ideas were thought up by Gellert Grindelwald (sorry 4 spelling), and built upon by Albus. I assume that he got more uneasy as time went on, and he realized that Gellert wasn't really much like he had thought.

He had renounced his old ways, and anyway, he was young. He's not evil; how were his ideas ever evil?

[Rush]

After listening to the GoF audio book, one thing about Dumbledore that I'm not sure of came to me. I really don't know what his intentions were when he informed Fudge that Voldemort had returned. Had he not wanted Fudge to believe him? I really can't believe that, but I have to disagree with the way he handled the situation with fudge.

During Dumbledore's discussion with Fudge during the chapter, the Parting of the Ways, Dumbledore seems to be very hard to believe. As intelligent and great as Dumbledore is, I question the way he approached Fudge. As Dumbledore begins to tell Fudge that Dumbledore is back, Fudge is skeptic. He hasn't necessarily ruled out Voldemort's return, but he still has trouble believing. I think Dumbledore should've left it at that, telling Fudge he'd be in talk with him later. Instead, Dumbledore tells Fudge to abandoned the Dementors (a great idea, but unrealistic at the time being) and to make friends with the giants. During the present conditions, these idea's are absolutely ridiculous and give Fudge the impression that Dumbledore is off his rocker.

I think of it this way, if you are having trouble believing something, yet it seems to be possible, the last thing that will make you believe what you are hearing would be something completely appaling. Had Dumbledore taken it slowly and gave Fudge evidence that supported Voldemort's return and then offered advice, he may have been able to be working along side the Ministry rather than against it. I think that Dumbledore didn't see Fudge as a leader who would make a difference, and didn't truly want him as a leader against Voldemort. In this example Dumbledore seems to over look someone who he hasn't always agreed with in the past, and lost, perhaps, a great ally.

[arithmancer]

I disagree. I don't think Albus expected the reaction he got. The facts were on his side in this case, and he did present them. He himself was an eyewitness to a Veritaserum interrogation of Crouch Jr. There was the corroboration of Harry's story and Cedric's otherwise unexplained death. There was the evidence of Snape's Dark Mark. With that kind of evidence...I don't think Albus had any reason to think he needed to sweat his presentation of the facts.