Dumbledore's dispensability

[davewitley]

No: HPFGUIDX 39435

Cindy wrote:

>  I mean, isn't it pretty much a given that 
> *someone* will betray Dumbledore?  Dumbledore certainly has to get 
> out of the way so that Harry can save the wizarding world, right?  
> 
> That means that *someone* has to betray Dumbledore, and that 
someone 
> must have Dumbledore's trust (so that they can get the drop on him) 
> and must be capable of killing him.  I don't see Dumbledore losing 
a 
> duel with Voldemort or being ambushed.  Dumbledore is too smart and 
> powerful for that.  The only person who can bring down Dumbledore 
is 
> someone who has his trust and uses that trust to stab him in the 
> back.
> 
I think this chain of reasoning raises a number of issues.  We 
display a great deal of collective ingenuity to develop plot twists 
over Avery, Lupin, Florence, etc, yet when it comes to the final 
denouement, everything is assumed to run on cliched tramlines.

Why does Dumbledore have to be out of the way?  And if he is, why 
does he have to be killed in a duel or (perish the thought) an ambush?

Books 1, 2 and 4 end in a duel (of sorts) between Harry and Voldemort 
in some guise.  Only in Book 4 is it anything like a conventional 
duel.  Book 3 shows that they don't have to end that way.  It all 
depends on what JKR's concept of how the conflict between good and 
evil will be resolved, and the chief good guy killing the chief bad 
guy in single combat is only one end among many.

If she wanted to show that teamwork is essential to good winning 
(certainly a theme that can be argued, given the roles of Hagrid and 
Lupin) then you might have Dumbledore's age plus Harry's youth as 
part of the formula.  And Voldemort might self-destruct rather than 
be killed by any of the good characters - all it takes for one of his 
over-complicated schemes to backfire because of something he doesn't 
understand about Harry.

A few weeeks ago Heidi mentioned Pride and Prejudice: one of the 
things I really like about that book is the way the very natural 
actions of the nearest thing to a Voldemort figure - Lady Catherine 
de Bourgh eventually catalyse the good outcome in a way that seems 
inevitable in hindsight.   And in The Amber Spyglass I think it's 
neat the way The Authority is disposed of almost be accident, in 
passing.  In each case the messages are different.

What ending would endorse the messages we believe JKR is conveying 
through the HP series?

I realise these ideas aren't compatible but I can't put together long 
convincing scenarios: I'm just trying to get those of you who can to 
think outside the box.

David