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

[Steve]

No: HPFGUIDX 126572


--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" <bob.oliver at c...> wrote:
> Lupinlore:
> 
> ...edited...
> And of course, this is NOT just an issue of emotions.  It is also a 
> matter of thoroughly inadequate explanations.  Dumbledore's speech 
> left a lot of very important points unanswered -- enough to 
> legitimately think that JKR has not done a very good job of 
> justifying the repeated statements about Dumbledore's goodness to 
> which we've been treated.
> 
> Lupinlore

bboyminn:

I just finished a cup of coffee so I'm not sure if this post is fueled
by good ideas or just caffine. Regardless, here it goes...

Oddly, when I started typing this post, I credited the above quote to
LupinDore rather than LupinLore, and couldn't help wondering if fate
had guided my hand. (just a useless point of trivia)

When ever this subject comes up, the first thing that occurs to me is
that Dumbledore is 150 years old; he's been a lot of places and seen a
lot of things. Considered how many wars have occurred in the last 150
year, then add to that Dumbledore's historical knowledge of war and
conflict. 

In his lifetime, how many self-important self-proclaimed Dark Lords do
you think he has seen? How many pompous self-important but marginally
effective polititians like Fudge do you think Dumbledore has see? How
many schoolyard Draco-ish bullies do you think he has seen? How many
trapped-in-the-past, can't-let-go bitter people like Snape do you
think Dumbledore has seen? How many 'tragically misunderstood'
schoolboys, who alone (at least in their own view) can see and feel
life with clarity, do you think Dumbledore has seen? How many people,
that he knew personally, do you think Dumbledore has seen die? In
general, how many times, over and over again, do you think Dumbledore
has witnessed the follies of man?

Suffering is part of life; to be alive is to suffer, just ask any
Buddhist. I think Dumbledore in all his years of experience with the
follies and foibles of man (and yes, it is mostly men) has naturally
developed a calm mellow Buddha-like response to life.

Yelling and screaming, the wailing and gnashing of teeth, the throwing
of breakable objects, by Dumbledore, at this point, serves no purpose,
but letting Harry rage and storm does. We see clearly in each book,
that Dumbledore understands that Harry must express himself whether by
emotion or by retelling a terrible tale. Harry must purge the 'poison'
from his system. But as any good councilor knows, when those you
council dump their 'poison', it's best that you as councilor do not
then pick up that poison and internalize it. 

So in conclusion (I think the coffee is starting to wear off), I think
we are seeing the wisdom of age in Dumbledore and the Buddha-like calm
that comes with it. 

As to Dumbledore's seeming inadequate imcomplete explanations, I think
we are seeing two things, one internal to the story and one external. 

First, the author must limit information, JKR could have to us
'everything' in the first books during the end of year conversation
with Harry, but then wouldn't that have ruined the remaining books for
us; not much of a mystery if you know the answers going in. 

The second part is that Dumbledore must be pragmatic, he has a job at
hand, a task which must be accomplished, a problem with tremendous
consequences the must be dealt with. Part of a Buddha-like calm and
wisdom is to know that no matter what happens, you must simply carry on. 

Life means suffering, life means death, and when they happen, life
goes on. A great priest in the meditative tradition was asked by one
of his students, "What is it like to be enlightened?". The priest
answered, "Before I was enlightened, I chopped wood and carried water,
now that I am enlightened, I chop wood and carry water". 

I fear that Dumbledore has a great deal of very important wood to chop
and water to carry, and the best he can do is get on with it.

...then again, it could just be the coffee talking.

Steve/bboyminn