In Defense of DD (was Re: DD's dilemma)

[lupinlore]

No: HPFGUIDX 126556


--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tonks" <tonks_op at y...> wrote:
> 
> 
> <SNIP>
> 
> Also DD is able to control his emotions and Harry has not let 
> learned to.  Controlling ones emotions so that those emotions can 
> not be used against you by someone like LV, is not the same as not 
> caring. DD is IMO able to acknowledge his feelings, but not let his 
> feeling overpower him. We see from Harry's situation (being led to 
> the MoM by LV) what can happen when one is not able to control 
> emotions. It is one of the lessons that Snape has learned perhaps a 
> bit too well.  A wizard must be in total control of himself at all 
> times if he is going to fight the forces of evil.  DD knows this 
and 
> can do it.  But he lets his guard down just a bit and we see his 
> tear.  This one tear is a very powerful image if you ask me.  DD 
> doesn't have to turn into a blubbering idiot to show us that he 
> cares.  I think it is very, very clear that he cares.  I think that 
> he even cares for Tom, but does not like what Tom has chosen to 
> become.
> 

I suppose a lot of it comes down to what you view as goodness.  Is a 
person who controls themselves and thus "floats above" the ordinary 
fray of humanity good, or simply detached?  Does getting involved in 
the pain and sorrow of life, including the pain of others, make you 
lose perspective?  If Dumbledore did indeed choose not to bribe or 
threaten the Dursleys because he feels it would be morally wrong, 
does that make him good?  Or does it merely make him selfish and 
finicky, willing to opine endlessly about right and easy but 
unwilling to actually soil his hands to bring about a right outcome?  
Does viewing and treating Harry as a weapon serve a greater good?  Or 
is it a reprehensible "ends justify means" mindset that ultimately 
leads to damnation?

What you, Tonks, see as laudable self-control, many of us see as 
deplorable coldness.  What you see as noble adherence to the good, 
many see as tacit approval of abuse.  I'm not trying to be 
argumentative, merely to lay out the differences clearly.

You use the metaphor of God or a Saint to describe Dumbledore.  Fair 
enough, I suppose.  However, neither of those is very clear. People 
differ widely over what they expect from God and what kind of 
behavior they regard as saintly.  To use a Biblical example in 
keeping with it being Good Friday, some people are attracted to the 
Jesus of the Gospel of John who calmly gives a series of pithy 
lessons from the cross.  Others, myself included, are much more in 
tune with the Jesus of the Gospel of Matthew, who screams "My God, my 
God, why hast thou deserted me?" (Yes, yes, I know he was quoting the 
psalms, but still.)  Do you prefer the Jesus who calmly prophesies 
Peter's betrayal, or the one who weeps over his dead friend Lazarus 
and who drives the money changers from the temple in a fit of 
righteous rage?

Which is only to say, in the end, that if you can buy the Dumbledore 
JKR is selling, more power to you!  However, that does not change the 
fact that I, and many others, simply cannot.


Lupinlore