Draco and Dumbledore LONGish

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 160160

> Alla:
> > Does it make sense to you? I just think that whether in 
fictional 
> > reality or even in RL the leader, the politician who has
> > supposedly **right** or **light** objectives in mind, should at
> > least enter the fight **trying** to choose what is right, not 
> > between two evils.
<SNIP>
>> Jen: You don't think he knows he's made wrong choices? I know the 
> subtle little ways JKR attempts to show Dumbledore feels pain 
about 
> his choices is not enough for people sometimes, but they have 
always 
> been enough for me. And if the twinkle leaving his eyes or the 
tear 
> aren't enough, the cave was particularly brutal. I used to think 
> Dumbledore was experiencing pain over one particular incident; now 
I 
> wonder if it wasn't his whole *life* he was lamenting 
there: "Don't 
> hurt them, please,....hurt me instead."  <SNIP>

Alla:

Absolutely, if cave was Dumbledore's agony over some choices he 
made, it is good enough for me. That **was** painful enough and 
agonizing enough for me.

Sorry, no tear was not enough for me, at all, after that speech he 
made, no way. Just additional reason to slap him, lol.

But did he think that by protecting Draco and Snape, if that was 
what he was doing he made a wrong choice?

See, I don't know. He was brushing off Draco's murder attempts way 
too casually on the Tower as far as I am concerned.

And  going back to Renee's points:

> Renee:
> Yes, I think there's a large grey zone, especially in the last two 
HP
> books. There is black and white at either side of the grey, but a 
lot
> of what's going on is taking place in this grey zone. 

Alla:

I am not disagreeing with this at all, I am just not sure how far 
into grey JKR will go, that is all.

 
> Alla: 
> > Are you thinking in terms of JKR indeed writing the series with 
main 
> > idea " there is no good or evil, only power"? <SNIP> 
> Renee:
> No, I don't think JKR is writing the series that way. 

Alla:

Heee, good that we agree, I do not think so either.


Renee:
Why do you think
> that describing a choice between two evils (or maybe I should say, 
two
> bad things) is the same as suggesting the dichotomy good-evil does 
not
> exist? The fact that the choice is between evils, automatically 
means
> there *is* such a thing as evil, I'd say. <SNIP> 

Alla:

Just what I said previously - I think it is easy enough to loose 
sight that the choice is between two evils that is all. Sorry, 
struggling to explain it.
But most importantly, it would be quite cool if that was indeed 
true, Dumbledore knowing that he is choosing between two evils, but 
I am **not** sure at all that JKR means to show Dumbledore as 
choosing between two evils.

I have a suspicion that JKR absolutely means to see Dumbledore's 
choices in HBP as not choice between two evils, but choosing what is 
right, you know?

And by showing that Draco will go to the right side and Snape will 
do something heroic ( no, I am not giving up "bad" Snape, hehe, I am 
just pretty convinced that even if he is OFH or Evil, he will do 
something selfless for once at the end), JKR will try to convince us 
that everything that Dumbledore did in HBP was right, danger to 
students does not really matter, if it makes sense?

And that just does not sit with me well. :(
 
> Renee:
> But can't you envisage a situation in which the only choice is 
between
> two evils (or undesirable things, or whatever you want to call it) 
Of
> course, if there is a third, better option, I'd expect the leader 
to
> choose that. But this isn't always the case. 

Alla:

Sure, **sometimes** I can, but I also think that very ** often** 
this reasoning is used to justify the abandoning the third option, 
because third **right** option is indeed much harder to go with, you 
know?

I have a feeling for example that executives of Elron had plenty of 
justifications in their minds for doing what they did. Like maybe 
they reasoned that their only choice would be to protect their 
shareholders or to lose all their income or something like that?

Does not mean that third option did not exist IMO.

> Carol responds:
> <HUGE SNIP>
That would be like murdering Snape, whom
> Dumbledore and the students need, whether Harry knows it or not, 
or so
> Dumbledore firmly believes (and so do I). *If* that view is 
correct,
> how could Dumbledore possibly risk activating the UV by 
confronting an
> unready and unrepentant (but terrified) Draco?

Alla:

Well, that is the crux, isn't it? You seem to think that 
Dumbledore's main objective should be keeping Snape alive, right? 
Because he needs Snape that badly, correct?

I do not. I think that Dumbledore's objectives are a bit screwed if 
he thinks that way.

Carol: 
> And can someone please answer my question about why DD *chose* to 
fly
> to the tower in his weakened state knowing that Draco would try to
> kill him and the UV would be activated unless he knew he was dying,
> knew or hoped that Draco would realize that he wasn't a killer, and
> knew that Snape would have to kill him? Why, Alla and those who 
agree
> with her, didn't he just stay at the Three Broomsticks, trusting 
the
> Order to take care of things, and summon Snape ("I need Severus!")
> with his Patronus?
<SNIP>


Alla:

What does that has to do with  arguing whether Dumbledore 
sufficiently protected other students?

I mean, obviously we can just speculate why he flew there, but I 
doubt you will like my speculations :)

Dumbledore's trusting Order to take care of things? Um, when did he 
ever do that?

Dumbledore wanted to participate personally in the battle of MOM, 
maybe he wanted to do the same thing here.

Maybe he finally realized that it **is** time to talk to Draco, 
better late than never.

In short, I can see **plenty** of reasons why Dumbledore would 
choose to fly to the Tower **other** than what you seem to be 
suggesting - that he flew there to sacrifice himself.

JMO,

Alla