Canon for BADD ANGST (Re: Spying Game Philosophy - The Phoenix must die!

[Jen Reese]

No: HPFGUIDX 81154

Sandy, I snipped the parts where we simply disagree on the 
interpretation of canon--You ascribe to MDDT and thus read the quotes 
to support your theory; I suscribe to BADD ANGST and thus read the 
quotes to support my theory (and never the two shall meet, I 
suspect. ;)  

My interpretations on the canon info in the previous post are the 
same, except that I'm willing to scrap the Weasley quote as an 
assumption made by Arthur rather than a direct quote from Dumbledore. 


Now on to the debate!

Sandy:
I can see Dumbledore as willing to work within the system and 
Dumbledore who is bringing about the end by fire easily as attributes 
of the same man; Dumbledore is like a yoga (no, not Yoda!) master: 
infinitely flexible, but with very clear results in mind.
<snip>
Who said Dumbledore thought he could rid the world of 
> evil? I think he is simply orchestrating an unavoidable example for 
> everyone of the need to change society in such a way (like by 
> splitting up power between wizards and other entities, like 
goblins) 
> that no single evil can never get quite so bloated again.
> 

Jen Reese: I don't argue the validity of the MDDT TBAY when it states 
that Dumbledore wants a *transformation* in the underlying structure 
of the WW; Pip!Squeak makes that point admirably and it's supported 
by canon in the original post.

But I am curious about your take on MDDT on *how far* Dumbledore is 
willing to go to "bring about the end by fire."  Do you read it to be 
a symbolic transformation or a literal one? Because here's what Pip!
Squeak says:

PipSqueak:

"And yes, if the WW is irredeemably evil, it is better to sacrifice 
it for the future. That is a decision that has been made before. 
(Response to my Reaction to TBAY post)"

"The Wizarding World must be prepared to destroy itself in order to 
defeat Voldemort and all his kind for ever." (original TBAY).


Jen:
I have a problem believing this is Dumbledore's intent, and that's 
the point I was trying to make with the canon quotes: Dumbledore will 
not sacrifice his commitment to the magical code to transform the WW 
through annihilation. The main reason being we have multiple canon 
examples of Dumbledore's theory on "choice."  He will never get 100% 
of the WW to choose destruction, so destroying the WW without consent 
is an example of force and not choice.


Sandy now:
But again, if he understands magic's 
> mysteries better than anyone else (as canon profligately implies), 
he 
> may be better at navigating its "boundaries" than anyone else in 
the 
> WW. What if Dumbledore's agenda *is* the epitome of the laws which 
> make magic work? Some law of magicodynamics? Oh, oh, what if it's 
> *circular*: the uberest-wizard has the most power, and the most 
power 
> over the people, and what magic consists of is what it is defined 
by 
> in the collective unconscious? 


Jen Reese: Ok, I think I'm getting what you mean--that Dumbledore's 
agenda is the ultimate expression of the ancient magical mysteries, 
(The Code of the Phoenix, perhaps?!?).  Hmmm, that's a very 
interesting thought. It would still be a Hitler-like theme though, 
and wouldn't follow DD's choice theory--a sort of Wizard destruction 
imperative, with Dumbledore forcing destruction of the WW to follow 
the Code to its natural end.  Correct me if I'm interpreting your 
thoughts wrong, though. 


Jen