Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity (was Prophecy problems)

[bluesqueak]

No: HPFGUIDX 79390

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kirstini" wrote:
> <sighs>
> I must confess myself a little disappointed by the willingness of 
> people on this thread to take Dumbledore at face value. I'm not 
> necessarily rooting for a revival of ESE!DD, but I did expect to 
warm 
> the cockles of at least a couple of sceptics out there. I'm not 
> entirely sure that Dumbledore has ever conducted himself with the 
> integrity you attribute to him, much less that the section of the 
> prophecy Harry has seen correalates to any objective truth simply 
> because Dumbledore *says* it does.

Dumbledore at face value? ::Pauses thoughtfully::

Naah! When I get to produce my post on MAGIC DISHWASHER with new, 
improved Order of the Phoenix (which at the rate I'm going will be 
about two months before Book Six comes out), I will not be taking 
Dumbledore at face value. In fact, I think OOP confirms me in my 
long held and much argued theory that Dumbledore is a manipulative, 
lying, son-of-a- ... err, spymaster [grin].

In a good sense, of course. Not because he wants to be a 
manipulative liar, but because the alternative (Voldeworld) will 
involve such blood and terror that the quality of life of one small 
boy will seem very small beer indeed. Dumbledore is betting that if 
Harry *is* ever able to look back on his life from a vantage point 
of victory, he will agree that Dumbledore made the right choices. 

Rather than the easy one of giving Harry a happy life.

*However*, the evidence that Pensieves provide objective evidence is 
becoming very strong. Both in GoF and OOP Harry is able to wander 
around in the scene and observe things that the person whose memory 
it is could not have seen.

In GoF, Harry can see Mad Eye Moody's expression when Moody is 
behind Dumbledore. In OOP, Harry can read what his father was 
doodling on a scrap of paper - despite Snape being several tables 
away.

In both cases, the Pensieve appears to not so much store the 
person's *memory* as use the memory to access the actual event. We 
already know that the WW understands time well enough to construct a 
Time Turner [which incidentally, also implies that the speed of 
light isn't a barrier to the WW ;-) ]. So it should be possible for 
them to create a spell that allows you to observe past events.

The memory appears to be the trigger. In OOP, Harry suspects that if 
Snape wanders too far away from James, Harry won't be able to follow 
James. Just as the time turner requires Harry and Hermione to be 
wearing the chain, the pensieve requires a connection between events 
and original observer.

But it only needs the *connection*. You don't need to have seen 
everything [Dumbledore certainly did not see Moody's expression when 
he gave evidence about Snape], but you need to have been there.

So, given the evidence that Pensieves provide an objective account 
of the event the 'trigger memory' is evoking; we can almost 
certainly trust the prophecy to be accurate in its wording.

This most certainly does *not* mean that Dumbledore's interpretation 
has any relationship to objectivity. The line where Dumbledore 
actually tells Harry 'there is no doubt' is described as being 
spoken with 'great effort'. The implication is that Dumbledore finds 
it very painful to tell Harry that he must kill or be killed.

Another possible interpretation is that Dumbledore speaks 
with 'great effort' because he finds it genuinely, horribly 
distasteful to have to tell Harry a direct lie.

Dumbledore does lie (mainly by misdirection). In the last chapter of 
PS/SS, *before* he gives Harry his 'no lies' promise, he tells Harry 
that preventing Voldemort's return 'will merely take *someone else* 
who is prepared to fight what seems a losing battle next time ...  
[my emphasis].

So, there is a choice. Choice one: Dumbledore is lying by 
misdirection in PS/SS. He tells Harry that he does not bear the 
burden of defeating Voldemort, *someone else* can also fight 
Voldemort and delay if not defeat him. 

This line is said in what we are told in OOP is Dumbledore's full 
knowledge of the prophecy. If Dumbledore truly believes that Harry 
is 'the one' of the prophecy, he's lying when he tells Harry that 
(by implication) Voldemort can be defeated by continual delay, and 
you don't have to worry about it.

Or he is lying directly in OOP. Harry may or may not be 'the one'. 
Or the fact that the date is repeated twice means that there *are* 
two people who have the power to vanquish Voldemort. So in PS/SS 
Dumbledore may have known that there might be *someone else* who can 
fight Voldemort, and eleven year old Harry really could go 
unworriedly to sleep that night. 

And a final possibility (for the Dumbledore is the epitome of 
goodness fans) is that Dumbledore is simply wrong in his 
interpretation. He's made the best guess he can about the prophecy's 
meaning. But it is only a guess. 

And in PS/SS he was just hoping like heck that the prophecy was 
talking about a long, long time in the future, and maybe Harry was 
going to beat Voldemort to death with his walking stick ;-)

 

Kirstini:
> However, it has just occurred to me that Harry if Pensieves really 
> are objective, Harry may be able to review his memory of the point 
> when it broke and actually listen to what Ghosty Sybill has to 
say. 

Another argument for 'the wording is accurate'. Though I hope none 
of the DE's witnessed the breakage [grin]. 


Pip!Squeak

For the original 'Dumbledore as Spymaster', see "The Spying Game": 
 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/39662

and for an alternative view of 'Voldemort is quite bright really and 
his DE's might not be as useless as they seem', see 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/4044