[HPforGrownups] Re: JKR Chat "The Crucial and Central Question"

[Laura Ingalls Huntley]

No: HPFGUIDX 92392

Laura (me):
>> Please.  Dumbledore could have solved *both* these problems by
>> raising Harry himself.  I'm sorry, but it's the least he could have
>> done for a child that was destined to save the Wizarding World, if he
>> had *truly* had that child's best interests at heart.

greatelderone:
> Except we've seen that Dumbledore is a very busy man. Aside from
> leading an underground movement against a dark lord he also had to
> run a school and maintain order there. Look at what happened when an
> unpopular headmaster like Umbridge was appointed. Besides he's an old
> man not exactly versed in taking care of a child.

I'll give you that he's busy.  I'll even give you that he may have been 
a less than desirable father (I disagree with you there actually -- I 
think Dumbledore is better than most Potterverse adults at 
understanding and connecting w/ children).  But remember the 
alternative?

I just don't buy that he was too *busy* to save an innocent child (who 
he *knew* would someday have to save the world) from a childhood of 
emotional and physical abuse.

And I don't know if it could technically be said that there was all 
that much to do  in the underground movement department, at least after 
the first couple years or so, as the DE's were pretty much subdued by 
that time and Voldy was kinda incorporeal.

Laura:
>> As for Sirius's death in OotP -- I don't think Dumbledore specifically
>> orchestrated it, but I don't think he's particularly sorry it 
>> happened,
>> either.  What better way to teach Harry the lessons he needs to learn?

greatelderone:
> Except sacrificing Sirus, a powerful wizard in his own right, just to
> teach Harry a lesson is not worth it especially since Voldemort had
> already begun making the alliance with the giants..

Well . . . can Sirius *really* be considered an asset in OotP?  He's 
impetuous, irrational, and spoiling for a fight -- not to mention he's 
a bad influence on Harry (keeps trying to get him to do inadvisable 
things).  *And* he can't leave the headquarters (except that he does 
anyway, which just causes more trouble).  We know that *Sirius*, at 
least, feels that he isn't being productive in the Order.  I'm *really* 
not saying that Dumbledore *wanted* Sirius to die, mind you, just that 
it was probably sort of convenient for him.

(Note: the above was not an attack on Sirius -- personally, I think 
Dumbledore made a very bad decision in cooping him up in that house, 
alone with Kreacher, waiting for all the people who were actually 
*doing* something for the Order to come back so he could make them tea. 
  Really, I can't think of a worse situation to put a man like Sirius 
in.  It's just like *begging* him to do something rash.)

Laura:
>> Dumbledore *is* moulding Harry into a weapon with which to destroy
>> Voldemort.

greatelderone:
> I think the term champion works better.

Perhaps.  Although, note JKR's own implication of Harry as a "weapon."  
Again, I'm not saying that Dumbledore is *bad* or unethical or 
anything, just that he's pulling Harry's strings for the greater good 
and I think he's gonna get burned for it.

Laura:
>> And he *is* sorry -- he *does* care for Harry -- I believe
>> he was being sincere when he "explained everything" at the end of 
>> OotP.
>>   In this case he has chosen between what he thinks is right, and what
>> would be easy.

greatelderone:
> If he had chosen the easy route he'd have allowed Voldemort into
> Harry sooner and then killed Harry while Voldemort was inside Harry's
> mind. The fact that he didn't do that and had Snape teach Harry
> occlumency thus sacrificing Snape's time as a OOTP member and as a
> spy signals that he cares for Harry and wants him intact.

I have no doubt he cares for Harry, and I do think he has limits on 
just how much he'll put the kid through.  He might orchestrate Harry's 
childhood so that he grows up able to depend only upon himself when he 
needs to, but I don't think he would go so far as to, for instance, let 
Ron or Hermione die to give Harry a reason to go after Voldy.

As for the example you cited above, Dumbledore "knows" that *Harry* is 
the only one capable of killing Voldy, doesn't he?  I'm not saying that 
he would have done it if he'd thought it would work, but that 
particular example doesn't really prove anything.

Laura (who hopes the citing in this message isn't *too* confusing.)