Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity

[kiricat2001]

No: HPFGUIDX 79731

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Wanda Sherratt" 
<wsherratt3338 at r...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kiricat2001" 
<Zarleycat at a...> 
> wrote:
> > If keeping Sirius locked up in that house was Dumbledore's idea 
of 
> a 
> > great way for Sirius to be able to live, really live, then 
> > Dumbledore's not being either Macchiavellian or fatherly - he's 
> being 
> > sadistic.  The only way to give Sirius a chance to live was to 
> find 
> > Pettigrew and bring him to justice.  We heard not a peep about 
> that 
> > in OoP because everyone was so busy with the prophecy stuff. 
> > 
> > I think your points are quite valide with Harry, but I just don't 
> see 
> > it with Sirius.
> > 
> I understand that people who didn't want Sirius to die might think 
> that Dumbledore has the broadest shoulders so he should carry the 
> heaviest blame, but I just don't see it.  "Sadistic" is a pretty 
> extreme word.  Umbridge is sadistic; I don't see how any reasonable 
> person can class Dumbledore with her. 

My reply to the original post had nothing to do with assuming or 
wanting or expecting Dumbledore to have the broadest shoulders, or to 
shoulder the heaviest blame.  I was merely replying to the other 
poster's assertion that Dumbledore was being fatherly by insisting 
that Sirius stay in locked up in that house.  Yes, "sadistic" is a 
strong word, but to paint Sirius' situation as the result of fatherly 
impulses struck me as very far off the mark.  Forgive me for using a 
bit of hyperbole.  And for being an unreasonable person.

Marianne