Dumbledore Does Lie - Sort Of

[pippin_999]

No: HPFGUIDX 159171


> Alla:
> 
> Huh? Are you arguing that we should praise Dumbledore for not using
> Legilimency on Harry like every minute when they talk? I mean, of
> course Dumbledore does not use Legilimency on Harry every single
> time, of course he uses it on him when he suspects Harry lies to him.
> 
> Does it make the use of Legilimency more appropriate? Does
> Dumbledore has sense of entitlement to know truth every time Harry
> wants to conceal it from him? Not in my book.

Pippin:
I don't think Dumbledore needs legilimency to know when Harry is
lying to him. I think that's obvious from body language, vocal inflection
and common sense. He uses legilimency *after* Harry's lied to him,
when the lie itself proves there's something Harry thinks Dumbledore
has a right to know. Otherwise, Harry could just refuse to answer
the question.

Alla:
> Are you saying that If he knew that in addition to celebrating Draco 
> threw Trewlaney out he would not have gone after horcruxes?
> 
> Why? Just curious.

Pippin:
Trelawney and Harry could have given evidence that Draco was 
involved in an attack.  That's what Dumbeldore was waiting
for, because without proof he knew he wouldn't be able to get 
Draco to accept the Order's protection or  else send him to
Azkaban to keep him from being murdered.

Harry, meanwhile, was so anxious to get Dumbledore to agree that
Draco was plotting something that he neglected to report what 
Draco had actually done. 


> Pippin:
> > I'm sure Dumbledore thought Harry would think he had enough to do
> > with classes and homework and adolescence generally without being
> > expected to save the world from Voldemort singlehanded.
> 
> Alla:
> 
> Harry was already doing that by the time of OOP with Ron and
> Hermione and by himself too, all that he would have learned is why
> he is doing that. As I said, it was significant burden to add, I get
> it, but not as significant as for any **normal** child, who did not
> encounter Voldemort yet IMO.
> 

Pippin:
There is a huge difference between knowing that Stalin is after 
you  and thinking that you are the only one who can stop Stalin.
Through OOP, Harry was only trying to stay alive. He never 
thought he had to hunt down Voldemort and destroy him.
 
> Alla:
> So, yeah, I stand by my assertion that people who do not like
> Dumbledore's leadership style did not have much choice, that is if
> they fully support Dumbledore's side of course.

Pippin:
But it's the things you don't like about Dumbledore, his aloofness
and his uncompromising nature,  that let him hold the Order to a 
higher standard. If he just did what would make his followers happy,
he'd be no better than Scrimgeour or Fudge. He doesn't try to
justify his positions because at bottom they're not based on logic --
you either feel in your heart that what he wants you to do is right, 
or you don't.

I don't get what you mean about Dumbledore dragging people to
a better future. He hasn't got a gulag, and nobody is being dragooned
into the Order. He waited as long as he could to tell Harry about
the prophecy because he didn't want Harry  to feel that he
*had* to be the one to destroy Voldemort even though the prophecy
 predicted it.   He'd already said in PoA that even genuine predictions 
weren't necessarily meaningful, so I can't fault him too much for
not reminding Harry of this immediately in OOP, where the main
point he was trying to get across was that Harry need not 
blame himself for Sirius's death.
 

Pippin