Gandalf and the Dishwasher/Enough is enough (for now)

[Grey Wolf]

No: HPFGUIDX 47218

Russ (Fun_n_games) wrote:
> What if Dumbldore doesn't know all that is going on, although he 
> knows more than others.  Further, what if he chooses, for whatever 
> reason, to not be the lead actor in the battle with V, but to be the 
> powerful "counselor" who encourages the lesser mortals to take 
> responsibility into their own hands and carry on the fight?
> 
> I liken this to Gandalf--the wizard who has the power to fight Sauron 
> himself, but because of moral codes and the codes of the Gods, must 
> only counsel the humans, encourage them to do what is right, give 
> them sufficient knowledge to wage the battle--but ultimately let 
> winning or losing the battle rest with those who will be left when 
> the battle is over.

The basic stumblicng block I have with your theory is exactly that 
Gandalf parallelism. As you have mentioned, Gandalf had been forbidden 
to take a direct hand in the affairs of men due to his condition of 
semi-god which wasn't actually part of Middle Earth (or something along 
those lines; I am not particularly knowledgable in Middle Earth 
theory). What is stopping Dumbledore, then? There has been no mention 
of Higher powers forbidding Dumbledore to act, and we know he *has* 
participated in the past (i.e. Grindewald). Introducing a superior 
being at this point would be premature, unless you take hold of 
metathinking and reduce it to "I don't think JKR plans Dumbledore to 
participate in this war". At which point we would separate ways, 
because I don't think so (this is pretty obvious, if anyone has read my 
views on MD).

But I don't thik you are going that way, so let's hear the answer to 
that question. While that happens, let me nitpick a little more.
 
> Yes!  I have cannon to support the theory.  In PS, Dumbledore gives 
> Harry the tools and knowledge to fight V--he teaches him about the 
> mirror, he has Hagrid pick up the stone with Harry in tow, etc. I get 
> the feeling in PS that Dumbledore knows exactly what Harry is doing 
> to uncover the secret.  He probably knows that Harry has mistakenly 
> pinned it on Snape.  He's going to let the action go, however, and 
> let the "lesser humans" assume the responsibility for protecting the 
> stone.  Ultimately, though, he lets Harry choose--do I go through the 
> trap door?  Do I fight?  It is Harry's choice to jump into the 
> battle, and ultimately it is Harry who must win, with a last minute 
> save by D pulling Quirellmort off of Harry.

As Harry himself mentions at the end of PS, it is very possible that 
Dumbledore used that oportunity to further Harry's education in a 
practical way: facing Voldemort once again. Without going into Melody's 
variant of first shot at destroying Voldemort, Harry needed that 
oportunity to learn about Voldemort, which is not the sort of thing 
that can be taught to him "in theory". By facing him, he was facing his 
fears, learning about himself (his protection, his parents, etc.) and 
learning about the person who desperately wants to kill him. Which is 
always useful, in an information war. Note that this fits both 
theories: MD!Dumbledore was definetely playing the teacher all along, 
since he was hiding someplace nearby, ready to rescue Harry if things 
got out of hand (which, not surprisingly, they did).
 
> This theory can be carried through the other books.  In CoS, 
> Dumbledore calls Harry into his office and asks him if there is 
> anything Harry wants to tell him.  When Harry says no, Dumbledore 
> lets him go.  I get the feeling in this section that D is asking 
> Harry if he needs help.  Once again though, he shows Harry the tools 
> he will need--the hat and Fawkes.  Once again, Harry has to choose to 
> jump into battle by going down the opening.  It is also ultimately 
> Harry who must win the fight, once again with a few more favors from 
> D in the form of Fawkes and the sword.  In the end, Dumbledore tells 
> Harry the upshot of my theory--"It is our choices that make us who we 
> are."

This hasn't been particularly analized by MD, to tell the truth - it is 
not something Dumbledore could've planned, since he didn't know about 
the diary, and it is still uncertain whether Voldemort himself planned 
it (if it wasn't, then it's not part of MD, really). So, leaving MD for 
a while, you have to realise that DUmbledore probably knows that only 
someone with the capabilities of a heir could enter the chamber (which 
would explain why no-one else had been able to find it). Since 
Dumbledore suspects that Riddle aka Voldemort was the last heir, and 
that Harry has part of his powers, he might have been using Harry to 
get someone into the chamber. But since he's not a cruel person, he 
also has something prepared to get him out of trouble in case he 
succeds in finding the place (i.e. the hat and the pheonix). Going back 
to MD for a moment, part of the addendums I vaguely recall (I need that 
unifying post as much as anyone else) is that Dumbledore always has 
something ready to help Harry is things go seriously wrong (himself in 
PS, Fawkes & SH in CoS, Snape in PoA's SS, Harry himself in PoA's 
Dementor Dementia, but none in GG - because he didn't see it coming 
[yes, I like using double letters for situations in the books. It keeps 
with JKR's style]).

> Because of my theory, I would disagree with the defective potion 
> portion of magic dishwasher, because it presumes that D is the Master 
> Chess Player--moving pieces (in the form of Snape, Harry, and others) 
> in his fight with V, as opposed to merely being the counselor who 
> provides those who must live with the future with the tools necessary 
> to fight against the orchestrations of V.  D doesn't necessarily know 
> which move V is going to make.  Even D says in GoF that he didn't 
> know Crouch!Moody was the imposter until he took Harry away.  How 
> could D be the Master Chess Player if he doesn't know that a spy is 
> sitting right next to him?  No--many things come as a suprise to D.  
> He is not all knowing, but he finds the information and provides the 
> tools necessary to let "the future" make their own choices to carry 
> on the fight in response to what V does.

As many others, you seem to forget that Dumbledore is not playing a 
chess game *at all* - not even in MAGIC DISHWASHER. Voldemort and 
Dumbledore are fighting an information war, which means that the one 
who gets to know more about the enemy while hiding his own moves will 
win. Just like Dumbledore was able to fool Voldemort into using the 
potion, Voldemort was able to slip one of his DEs into Dumbledore's 
plac without him noticing. Good spies are, by definition, difficult to 
catch (the bad ones are dead).

Also, in relation with the free choices: Dumbledore does not make any 
of his allies choices, except indirectly. Let me explain that: you can 
read through all (pro-)MD posts and you'll never see a reference to 
Dumbledor forcing decisions on his allies. He does indeed make 
decisions for his enemies, but that's the core of any good plan: to get 
your enemy to do what *you* want, not what they would want.

How does he make choices indirectly? By education, of course. Many of 
your "free choices" are based on you education: of morality, of logic, 
of options, etc. Now, don't misunderstand me: I believe that those are 
still free choices, but they have been tainted by the morality of those 
that have taught you, especially in school years (and even more at the 
onset of puberty, which is when you are given the heavy moral 
education). If you check some of the posts on MD morality, you will see 
that it is a basic position that Dumbledore hopes that Harry will make 
the right choices (if he had allowed Lupin and Black to kill Peter, 
that particular plan would've fallen around Dumbledor's ears, 
especially since Snape was no longer in charge).


Brian wrote:
>    If an idea can be neither supported nor refuted due to lack of 
> information, then said idea IS NOT A THEORY! It is a hypothesis. 
> Let's just agree to call it a working hypothesis until OotP comes 
> out, or at least until Grey gets MD 2.0 up and running. Either way, 
> everyone gets a break from these increasingly hostile posts. (Plus, 
> my inbox won't get so full so fast)
> 
> Thank you all for your attention
> 
> bkb042

Hi, Brian,

Hypothesis:
1.	A tentative explanation for an observation, phenomenon, or 
scientific problem that can be tested by further investigation.
2.	Something taken to be true for the purpose of argument or 
investigation; an assumption.

Theory:
1.   Abstract reasoning; speculation: (example) a decision based on 
experience rather than theory. 
2.	A belief or principle that guides action or assists comprehension 
or judgment: (example) staked out the house on the theory that 
criminals usually return to the scene of the crime. 
3.	An assumption based on limited information or knowledge; a 
conjecture.

As you can see from those definitions, they are basically the same 
thing: both theories and hypothesis are "assumptions, speculation, 
conjecture". Please notice definitions (2) of hypothesis and (3) of 
theory.

Thus, MAGIC DISHWASHER, and evcerything else we want to draw from canon 
that is not canon itself is a theory OR a hypothesis. What it is not is 
a tautology, a theorem, a truth or Gospel (as Russ said).

Hope that helps,

Grey Wolf, who would like to use this oportunity to thank all those 
people who wrote to me after that hellishly long post yesterday to tell 
me you liked it. You know who you are, and I'm very grateful for it - 
it was very hard (and long) to write, and it's nice to know someone 
actually listens.