OoP - GUILTY Dumbledore (was Dumbledore's true sorrow motives)

[kiricat2001]

No: HPFGUIDX 67031

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "talisman22457" 
<talisman22457 at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "alexcukier" <acukier at u...> 
> reports having a "strange feeling. . .that Dumbledore is guilty 
> somehow."
> 
> Old Talisman, shaking the dust from her robes and wickedly dipping 
a 
> quillful of ink, responds (at Great Length):
> 
> Trust your instincts, Alex.  In the complex ambivalence of 
> Rowlingdom, good intentions mix easily with dark deeds and Albus 
> Dumbledore drinks deeply of this guilty draught.
> 
> As to Dumbledore's specific Decoy!Harry/Chosen!Harry theories, the 
> entrails are not clear. What is clear is that Dumbledore is willing 
> to sacrifice Weapon!Harry in any way necessary to defeat Voldemort.
> 
> What's more, I say, is that Book Five is the Wizengamot in which  
> Dumbledore, for all his noble intentions, is found Guilty!--not 
only 
> of being a cold-hearted manipulator, and Guilty! of being a great 
> and harmful liar, but yes--Guilty! of Murder!
> 
> Evidence for the Prosecution:
> (All cites from OoP unless otherwise noted)
> 
> I. The Nature Of Lies is an important theme that informs OoP, 
> probably worthy of a separate post, but consider some examples:
> 
>  1.) Petunia lies about her bases for wizarding knowledge (31) her 
> knowledge of LV (37-8) and her reasons for keeping Harry (41). Are 
> these good or bad lies? Too early to tell.
> 
>  2.) Ginny lies "unblushingly" about chucking dung bombs, and it's 
> charming. (75) We're liking her more already.
> 
>  3.) Mrs. Figg lies--on the witness stand--about seeing the 
> dementors (144) and in so doing saves innocent Harry from the 
> corrupt Wizengamot.
> 
>  4.) Harry tells the truth about LV, and is punished as a liar.
> Umbridge's torturous method of etching "I must not lie" in Harry's 
> bloody skin points up the ironic and pivotal nature of this 
question 
> (267). 
> 
>  5.)Hermione lies to Umbridge about whom they are trying to contact 
> in the fire. (747)  The lie saves Harry and the OoP, anything else 
> would have been traitorous.
> 
>  6.) Dumbledore is the biggest liar of all. 
>  
>      Dumbledore has always been willing to lie, e.g. "It was only 
> when he was back in bed that it struck Harry that Dumbledore might 
> not have been quite truthful." (SS 214)
> 
>      But in OoP, the frustration we suffer, along with Harry, at 
> Dumbledore's persistent noncommunication, drives home the magnitude 
> of his lies by ommision. (Though Hedwig knows we've been aggravated 
> with his silence since book one.) The only question is: how often 
> does he lie overtly?
> 
> II. Let's agree that Dumbledore's lies are all in furtherance of 
> his "noble" plan.  A plan, Dumbledore tells us, in which caring 
> about Harry is not permitted.(838) Protecting Harry's utility, 
yes.  
> Furthering Harry's personal happiness or dreams, no.
> 
> Group members have long observed that Dumbledore facilitates 
Harry's 
> confrontations with the Dark Lord. Harry recognised that himself 
> from the start:". . .instead of stopping us, he just taught us 
> enough to help." (SS 302) 
> 
> Dumbledore is always there to make sure his Weapon!Harry isn't 
> destroyed (is he testing whether Harry is "the one," or honing 
> Chosen!Harry's skills?).
> 
> Nonetheless, these machinations are undertaken without 
consideration 
> for Harry's needs and preferences.  Just part of a cold-
> hearted, "noble," plan.
> 
> (Small rant here where I say that consigning Harry to 10 years of 
> child-abuse has more to do with Dumbledore's discomfort at being 
> around someone he is "using" than the fact LV might come back in 10 
> years. (835)  In 10 years Harry is at Hogwarts and the "Petunia 
> pact" only protects him a few months or weeks out of the year.) 
> 
> So, to recap, Dumbledore lies and manipulates to further his cold-
> hearted plan, which always includes maneuvering Harry into/through 
> confrontations with LV. 
> 
> No exception in OoP in which I believe Dumbledore orchestrates 
> Harry's conflict with LV, and effectuates Sirius's death.
> 
> Why Sirius's death you say?  Because killing Sirius achieves 4-5 of 
> Dumbledore's goals:
>                    1.) It Activates "the power the Dark Lord
>                         knows not" (841), which in turn;
> 
>                    2.) Allows Dumbledore to further Verify that
>                        Harry is the chosen one;
> 
>                    3.)  It prepares Harry to receive the Prophecy
>                         (sort of cocking Weapon!Harry);
> 
>                    4.) Harry's lasting love-grief becomes Voldemort-
>                        Legilimency/Posession Repellent, thereby 
>                        ensuring Weapon!Harry's utility to "the
>                        noble plan," and incidently;
> 
>                     5.) It gets rid of someone who does care
>                         about Harry the person, and who would 
disobey
>                         Dumbledore to further Harry's happiness.
> 
> The Evidence Continues:
> 
> III. Dumbledore admits Sirius's death is his fault. (825)
>       
>      Dumbledore admits that by not warning Harry about the trick 
> that Dumbledore, himself, saw coming, he allowed Harry to fall for 
> it. (N.B. At the same time Dumbledore is busy warning experienced 
> adult wizards to beware LV's tricks so that they won't fall for 
them 
> (96).)
> 
> 
> IV. Dumbledore is aware that Sirius's nature--brave, clever, 
> energetic--makes him unlikely to stay home when other's (esp. 
Harry) 
> are in danger. (825)  Yet Dumbledore confines him to his miserable- 
> memory-laden childhood home.
> 
> Dumble dore does not contradict Harry when Harry points out how 
> Sirius hated being shut up, saying "that's why he wanted to get out 
> last night." (834)
> 
> In fact, if he's not faking, Dumbledore's icy facade appears to 
> crack here: guilt, guilt, guilt. 
> 
> (Pan back to Sirius saying,"Personally I'd welcome. . .a deadly 
> struggle for my soul[, it] would have broken the monotony nicely." 
> (82)
> 
> Not only does Sirius hate confinement, and love Harry, but he does 
> suffer from Snapes taunts about uselessness and cowardice. 
> 
> Dumbledore says not, but Dumbledore lies. (833) We see for 
ourselves 
> that Snape's taunting hurts Sirius deeply.  Sirius and Snape draw 
> wands over it (518-20) and battle is only averted by Mr. Weasley's 
> arrival. 
> 
> Dumbledore knows that Snape stopped giving Occlumency lessons, that 
> LV has been gaining more and more access to Harry's mind, and that 
> (just a lucky guess?) LV will bate Harry with Sirius. 
> 
> Dumbledore knows as well that if Sirius is told that Harry has 
> stepped into LV's trap, nothing will stop Sirius from going to 
> Harry's rescue. For extra insurance, let's just have Snape tell him 
> to stay home, shall we? (830)
> 
> Indeed, let's look at Snape's behavior on the fatal night.
> 
> O.K. Snape understands from Harry's cryptic message that LV is 
> springing his trap.
> 
> Then Snape sees Harry go off into the forest.  Snape doesn't see 
> Harry come out for awhile (how long??)
>    1) Contrary to what I've seen posted in the OoPFaq, Snape NEVER 
> searches the forest.  Dumbledore merely "says" (if we can trust 
him) 
> that Snape "intended" to search for Harry. (830) And, he 
> only "intends" that after sending the OoP to the M.O.M.
> 
>       Why would Snape assume Harry was at M.O.M.?  Umbridge went 
> into the forest.  Umbridge remained in the forest until Dumbledore 
> fetched her.  Why wouldn't it be MUCH more likely that Harry was 
> being assailed by Umbridge/centaurs/giants/werewolves/spiders/etc. 
> when he didn't come out soon enough to suit Snape? 
> 
>  Snape has special ways of communicating with OoP members (830), 
> surely that includes Dumbledore? Why is Dumbledore just a little 
too 
> late arriving at Grimmauld Place?  Just after Sirius left. (831)  
> How long did it take to interrogate Kreacher (assuming that was 
even 
> necessary)?  Why is Dumbledore so tardy to the party? 
> 
> No matter, he behaves badly enough when he arrives.
> 
> V. Dumbledore's guilty behavior at the M.O.M.
> includes his late arrival (OoP been fighting for 5 pages). 
> 
> But, he dashes down the steps to the floor of the Death Chamber, 
and 
> almost instantly neutralizes the Death Eaters. (805)
> 
> Oddly, "[o]nly one couple were still battling." (805)  Bellatrix 
and 
> Sirius.  Bellatrix misses (with what is apparently a stunning 
spell) 
> and then . . . JK drops to a new, one sentence paragraph, for the 
> crucial shot.
> 
> "The second jet of light hit him . . ."
> 
> The jet is the subject of the sentence.
> The person who fired the shot, and the color of the jet, are 
> mysteriously missing from the sentence. 
> 
> Sure Bellatrix had just finished a "first," shot.  So had 
Dumbledore.
> How about "the second jet aimed at him?"  Maybe even magiked to 
look 
> like it came from Bellatrix's direction?
> 
> Again:
> 
>         1. Dumbledore doesn't neutralize Bellatrix;
>         2. JK is coy about where jet came from.
> 
> You don't like it? Well try it another way.
> 
> VI. Let's say Dumbledore just takes advantage of what should have 
> been another stunning spell.  Why does it take Sirius "an age" to 
> fall? (806) Is is just Harry's subjective view?
> 
> Harry sees Sirius hit and leaps down the steps (compare Neville 
> coming down 808) before Sirius, who is on the dais (804), falls 
> through he archway.(806) Remember how Dumbledore controlled Harry's 
> fall to the Quidditch field in PoA? hmmmm. 
> 
> Moreover, Dumbledore is fast on the draw. (814)  But he doesn't try 
> to shield/deflect Sirius from falling through the veil. 
> 
> Dumbledore is right by the dais.  Dumbledore doesn't offer comfort 
> to Harry.
> 
> 
>         1. Dumbledore doesn't neutralize Bellatrix;
>         2. JK is coy about where crucial jet came from;
>         3. If Sirius just stunned, does Dumbledore "float" him
>            through veil?;
>         4. Fast-draw Dumbledore doesn't try to save Sirius from 
>            falling through veil;
>         5. Dumbledore doesn't comfort Harry.
> 
> VII Dumbledore is strangely inneffectual against Bellatrix, and 
> takes a long time to reveal himself in the M.O.M. lobby.
> 
> Harry has already been fighting Bellatrix for awhile, has clarified 
> that the prophecy is broken, and Voldemort, having Legilimened as 
> much from Harry, has appeared, before Dumbledore steps back in.  
> Another masterful manipulation.
> 
> Now Dumbledore can test his theory.  Dumbledore nonchalantly spars 
> with LV.  Then, just when Harry thinks LV is gone, Dumbledore 
orders 
> him to stay pinned under the statue guard, and 
> "[f]or the first time, Dumbledore sounded frightened." (815)
> 
> Why? Somehow (Legilimens?)Dumbledore knows LV is about to possess 
> Harry.  Now he'll find out: 1) whether Harry can be used as a tool 
> of LV's; 2) whether Sirius was killed in vain.
> 
> The possesion is thwarted when Harry considers joining Sirius in 
> death, and "his heart fill[s] with emotion." (816)
> 
> *Here is the power the Dark Lord does not know.  Activated
> 
> *Harry is a match for LV. Verification.
> 
> *Harry no longer cares about the petty, childish things of his 
> universe beore Sirius's death. He has further impetus for ending 
> VL's evil career: Preparation to receive the prophecy.
> 
> *Grieving Harry will be feeling the aching loss/love of Sirius for 
> years to come: LV can't stand to share those feelings: 
> Legilimens/Possession Reppellent.
> 
> *Sirius can't interfere with Dumbledore's "noble," heartless plan. 
> 
> How does Dumbledore know what thwarted LV's possession of Harry? 
> (844) How does he know what was in Harry's heart when LV was 
> banished?  How can he say: "It was your heart that saved you[?]"
> 
> Yet he knows immediately. (816)  And thereafter, he looks at Harry, 
> speaks to Harry and allows Harry to remain in his company.
> 
>         1. Dumbledore doesn't neutralize Bellatrix;
>         2. JK is coy about where crucial jet came from;
>         3. If Sirius just stunned, does Dumbledore "float" him
>            through veil?;
>         4. Fast-draw Dumbledore doesn't try to save Sirius from 
>            falling through veil;
>         5. Dumbledore doesn't comfort Harry.
>         6. Dumbledore manages the LV scene in lobby;
>         7. Dumbledore knows LV going to possess Harry;
>         8. Dumbledore knows Sirius love/grief thought repels LV;
>         9. Dumbledore gets:
>                            a. special power activation;
>                            b. chosen one verification;
>                            c. Prophecy preparation;
>                            d. LV repellent;
>                            e. no sirius interference. 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, yes. Sirius had to die.


Whooo! That was quite a ride! Let me add a little thought to it.  
Let's remember that Dumbledore gave evidence to the Ministry after 
the Potters died that Sirius was their Secret Keeper.  We have no 
evidence that Dumbledore ever tried to speak to Sirius to get his 
side of the story. (And, if Dumbledore was such a great Occlumens 
that he can sense if people are lying, had he spoken to Sirius, 
wouldn't he have ascertained that Sirius was telling the truth about 
the switch in Secret Keepers?)  If the above is true, having Sirius 
bunged up in prison would clear the field from the start.  No 
interference from the inconvenient godfather, so of course Harry can 
be safely put with the Dursleys.

On the other hand, why point Hermione and Harry in the right 
direction for them to rescue Sirius in PoA? Why not let Fudge have 
him?

Marianne