[HPforGrownups] Re: Sirius, Sirus, and more Sirius/ Blood protection

[Lynda Cordova]

No: HPFGUIDX 158488

> Julie:
> The more I think about it, the more I believe Dumbledore's
> actions may not have been about Sirius at all, but about the
> blood magic. He wasn't specifically trying to keep Harry
> away from Sirius, and he may not have even formed an opinion
> on Sirius's guilt even though he had been told Sirius was
> the secret-keeper.
Back to GH, I think Dumbledore was being proactive with
> Harry, sending him to the Dursleys because THAT is where
> he would be completely safe. Sirius, even if innocent,
> couldn't provide Harry the same iron-clad protection.

Alla:

The problem for me is that his actions are also about Sirius, no
matter what IMO, even if he indeed was thinking primarily about
blood protection and I have no problem believing that he indeed
**was** thinking primarily about blood protection. The problem for
me is **why** he took it upon himself to decide that blood
protection over the protection of love (I mean we do agree that
Sirius loved Harry, right? More that Dursleys did?) would be the
safest thing for Harry?

Lynda:

The thing is, since Sirius was thought to be a serial murderer, and was very
quickly headed for prison, there is no way any logically (or illogically)
thinking person would have put Harry into his custody.  Supposedly, Sirius
was the one that gave up the Potter family's location.  Oh yeah.  and once
everything came out into the open and the truth about who the secret keeper
had been was revealed, Sirius did make a bid to take over custody of Harry.
Of course, that came to naught when Sirius had to go into hiding again.  So
there's really nothing going on that's untoward with Dumbledore's decision
to place Harry into the Dursteys care.   Keep in mind that I have never
thought Dumbledore is portrayed as omniscient. I think his references to his
fallibility are to remind us of exactly that.

Lynda


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]