Little comments on Dumbledore, Lily and James, etc.

[naama]

No: HPFGUIDX 7983

--- In HPforGrownups at egroups.com, Firebolt <particle at u...> wrote:
> Charmian wrote:
> 
> 
> IMHO, Dumbledore *has* to die, or in any case
> somehow lose his omnipotence. Harry depends on him too much - he's 
never
> going to become mature enough and strong enough for a final 
showdown with
> Voldemort if deep down he's thinking that as long as Dumbledore's 
there,
> everything will be all right.

Why, oh, why does everyone here think that Dumbledore is a gonner? 
The argument that Harry "needs" Dumbledore to die so he can mature 
and so on is very unconvincing, IMO.  For one thing, Harry has 
already realized that Dumbledore isn't omnipotent - when he couldn't 
save Sirius; and that he's not omniscient - when he admitted that he 
never knew about MWPP the whole time. You don't have to kill the 
father in order to let the son become a man. A much better way is to 
have the son become a man through accepting his father's fallibility.
In the Lord of the Rings, where Gandalf plays a very similar role 
Dumbledore does in HP, he does not die at the end. He stays alive to 
orchestrate the downfall of Mordor and save Frodo and Sam (and the 
others). I don't present this as proof, of course, but just to show 
that Dumbledore dying is not structurally necessary . 

Naama