Can Dumbledore become invisible? Was: Question on PS

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 147792

 Jutika wrote:
> In PS DD says to Harry, "I don't need a cloak to become invisible." 
Does this mean that DD can become invisible using magic? If this is
the case why didn't he just become invisible when Snape was about to
kill him?

Carol responds:
This question ties in with why he doesn't summon Fawkes or use the
other defenses he uses against Voldemort in OoP, including, notably,
whirling around and disappearing with a swish of his cloak before
reappearing in another part of the room, which does not seem to be the
same as Disapparating/Apparating (impossible even for DD in Hogwarts).
And we also know that he has "watched [Harry] more closely than you
know" (quoted from memory from OoP), suggesting that he can either
become invisible or perhaps disguise himself as a dumbledore
(bumblebee) Animagus. (Then again, he could simply be "watching from
afar" using the instruments in his office, which seem to be less
fallible than Trelawney's crystal ball.)

To return to the question of why he didn't become invisible or use one
of the defenses that he used against Voldemort or Fudge, I can think
of three possible reasons: 1) These defenses require a wand, and Draco
has disarmed him, leaving him defenseless. 2) They don't require a
wand, but he's too weak to perform wandless magic. 3) He wants to save
Snape's (and Harry's and Draco's) lives at the expense of his own,
which can only happen if Snape kills him (or sends him over the tower
to die from the poison, which amounts to the same thing).

It seems to me that the Dumbledore who outduels Voldemort in OoP and
escapes from Fudge and his cronies earlier in the same book could
easily have defeated or escaped from Snape, even without a wand,
although doing so would have resulted in Snape's death from the UV.
But a weakened and possibly dying Dumbledore is another matter.
*Could* he have escaped from Snape using wandless magic if he chose to
do so, preventing Snape from becoming a murderer but dooming him to
die for failing to "do the deed"? If so, did he *choose* not to escape
because Snape's life, or Snape's ability to save Draco and get Harry
away from the DEs (Snape would have known that Harry was present
because of the second broom), was more important to DD than his own
life, especially if he was already dying through the combined
influence of the poisoned memory potion and the ring curse? Or did he,
in his weakened state, have no choice but to force Snape to choose
between losing his life (and accomplishing nothing, since DD and Draco
would have been murdered and Harry would have rushed into the fray and
been killed or kidnapped) or losing his soul for the greater good
(keeping his vow to save Draco and, more important, keeping Harry
alive at all costs)?

I don't know, and neither does Harry, because (unlike Snape?) we don't
have access to Dumbledore's mind. But if DD could defeat *Voldemort*,
he should have been able to defeat Snape, even in his weak and
wandless state, had he chosen to do so. Or so it seems to me.

Carol, wishing that DD could have saved himself, Harry, Draco and
Snape with a swish of his cloak, but realizing that an all-powerful
Dumbledore would make Snape's tragic dilemma and Harry's role as hero
superfluous