looong - musings on Dumbledore - Even Longer

[hickengruendler]

No: HPFGUIDX 158658

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, James Lyon <jnoyl at ...> wrote:

> No...he sends that lovable buffoon Hagrid to find him. No one 
bothers to introduce Harry to the WW world. No one bothers to tell 
him how to catch the train.

Hickengruendler:

IMO, Hagrid was meant to do this. That he forgot this is so Hagrid, 
and Dumbledore should have thought, that this might happen. However, 
I think one good explanation for why Dumbledore sent Hagrid instead 
of going himself, is that Harry wasn't the only Hogwarts student, who 
didn't know anything about the wizarding world. Maybe Dumbledore sent 
all the staff members to the several Muggleborns. (Though now I have 
a mental image of Snape or Trelawney actually appearing on a doorstep 
of a poor unsuspecting muggle family.)

IMO, there's no excuse for Dumbledore not doing anything to make the 
Dursleys treat Harry better. A few visits or maybe even letters in a 
month would probably have been sufficient for Harry being treated at 
least semily decent. But it's too late now to redeem Dumbledore from 
this. The damage was done by chapter two of book 1. JKR softened the 
blow a bit at the end of book 5, by giving Dumbledore a really good 
reason for sending Harry to the Dursleys, namely Harry's safety. But 
this still doesn't excuse, that he didn't care for his well beings 
for 10 years. 

 
James:
> 
> He refuses to train Harry to be able to face his fate.
> 
> He takes no interest in how his students are treated.
> 

Hickengruendler:

I really disagree with these points. Yes, Dumbledore could probably 
have done more to prepare Harry for his battle earlier, but he didn't 
do so out of love for him. He wanted him to enjoy at least a few 
years of his childhood/youth. I do not hold this against him. 

And I see no evidence, that Dumbledore doesn't care how his students 
are treated. We do not even know, what Dumbledore knows and what he 
doesn't. And anyway, as incompetent some of the teachers might be, I 
don't think anyone other than Snape (and Umbridge, but she's not 
hired by Dumbledore and Dumbledore had no power of her anyway, 
therefore she doesn't count) treated a student really badly. Granted, 
this does leave Snape. But again, we don't know how much Dumbledore 
knew and how much he doesn't. Seeing that Harry didn't tell about his 
detentions, I am sure nobody knew anything about Umbridge's special 
methods.

James:

> He expects Harry to act like an adult, while treating him like an  
> imbecilic child, and excuses Snape and Draco for their 
childishness  
> and cruelty.

Hickengruendler:

It's not Dumbledore's job to critisize Draco or Snape in front of 
Harry. Harry has enough knowledge about their flaws without 
Dumbledore telling him. What Dumbledore has to say about a Snape or 
Draco he probably says to them. There is no need to think he excuses 
all of their actions. Yes, I agree that he treated Harry to much like 
a child at first. But he admitted this in OotP and did treat him as 
an adult in HBP, particularly when he allowed him to accompany him to 
the Horcurx search, which is something the portrais on the wall 
disapproved of. He did keep it a secret, that Snape was the spy who 
overheard the prophecy, which is something he should have told Harry. 
But on the other hand, I find his motivations understandable. He 
wanted Snape and Harry to work together, and therefore he kept 
Snape's involvement in the Potters' death a sceret. A mistake? Yes, 
but an understandable one.

James:

> He takes no interest in the quality of teaching since he permits  
> Binns, Trewlaney, and Snape to stay on the payroll and can't be  
> bothered to try to find a qualified DADA teacher.

Hickengruendler:

As far as I can tell, he was capable enough to find at least three 
qualified DADA teachers, namely Lupin, Moody and (yes) Snape. Snape's 
DADA lessons we saw were IMO stellar (and much better than the 
Potions' lessons, maybe because he was finally happy with the 
subject?). Given that he has to find a new one for nearly fourty 
years in a row, I would argue three out of six isn't a bad quote at 
all. Whatever Dumbledore's flaws may be, it is definitely not his 
fault, that people refused to take the post, because they were afraid 
of the curse. What can he do? Forcing someone to take subject, while 
knowing very well, that it might end badly for them? 

I still think, even though I might be in the minority, that the 
problem is not with Trelawney but with the subject Divination. How 
can you teach something, that seems to be uncontrollable. Trelawney 
encourages the students to work in groups and to make some practical 
work in her class, which is at least something. Admittingly, Firenze 
is probably superior as a teacher, in explaining them how tricky 
seeing is and that it is likely they will see nothing at all, but he 
doesn't manage to teach them anything either. So it's not all 
Trelawney's fault. Granted, Binns is a flop. 
> 

James:   
> 
> He permits Hagrid to be sent to Azkaban without trial, he does 
nothing to get Hagrid's record cleared and place the CoS fiasco and 
the death of Myrtle on Tom Riddle. 

Hickengruendler:

Okay, I have to admit that now came the part of your post, where I 
really disagreed with about everything you said. How can he stop 
Fudge sending Hagrid to Azkaban? If you reread the chapter, it is 
clear that they disagreed over this and that Dumbledore tried to stop 
Fudging froms ending Hagrid there. But Fudge didn't listen to him and 
that's it. Dumbledore had no power to overrule the ministry. And he 
helped Hagrid a lot after the CoS fiasco and Myrtle's death for 
example in giving him a home and a job. Not to imagine how Hagrid 
would have ended up, if it weren't for Dumbledore. He knew that Tom 
was behind the attacks, but couldn't prove it. So what could he do 
about it? Some may say, that his mistake was to even let Tom into 
Hogwarts, but then, hindsight is always a good thing, and as creepy 
and unsympathetic the child Tom Riddle might have been, he was not 
yet beyond hope and there was no good reason not to allow him to 
enter Hogwarts, particularly since at the very least the school is a 
place to control someone's magic. And Tom said that Dumbledore kept  
a close on him, therefore I assume that this is what he did. But he 
couldn't supervise him 24/7, he had to do a few othe rthings, like 
teaching.  

James:

> He does nothing about a man being sent to Azkaban without trial, he 
does nothing to free said convict when he learns the man is innocent. 

Hickengruendler:

Sure he does. He tells Harry and Hermione to use the Time Turner. 
Granted, the best thing he could probably have done was using the 
Time Turner himself. But maybe *this* actually was some training for 
Harry's later mission, just like the tasks at the end of PS might 
have been. And again, I find it problematic to think that he's 
almighty. He might be the most powerful wizard, but he has not the 
power to overrule Barty Crouch senior's decisions. How many people 
did go to Azkaban without a trial? Why should Dumbledore help Sirius 
and not the other ones. Maybe Dumbledore wanted Crouch to give fair 
trials to everyone and Crouch simply refused. I mentioned this 
already in another place, but I think the person, who should have 
talked to Sirius was not Dumbledore, but Lupin. 

James:
 
> He does nothing to be sure that the CoS has released all of its 
secrets, he does nothing to establish what is petrifying the students 
(I mean, how many things could petrify?) or taking any actions to 
actually protect them.

Hickengruendler:

Yes, that's true. And I fear the only explanation is, that he is 
dictated by the plot here. At the very least he should have found out 
what was petriying the students. But he does take actions to protect 
them, namely in having them accompanied by the teachers all the time.

James:

> He allows dementors to attack Harry several times while on 
Hogwart's property or very close. 

Hickengruendler:

No he doesn't. He protested against the Dementors, but couldn't stop 
Fudge from sending them. He forbade the Dementors to enter the castle 
and the Quidditch pitch, and the one time, where they actually did  
appear on the Quidditch pitch, Dumbledore was furious.
 
James:
  
> He places no extra protection on Harry when he gets entered into 
the Triwizard Tournament and allows Harry to stumble his way through 

Hickengruendler:

I snipped a few parts about which I agree, particularly him hiding 
the Stone in Hogwarts. But I wonder what he should have done here? Is 
it even possible to place extra protection on Harry.
 
James:

> Can ANYONE think of ANY ACTION that DD has taken meddling in 
Harry's life that was actually of any net benefit to Harry?
 
Hickengruendler:

Well, Voldie tells at the end of GoF, that he couldn't attack Harry 
at the Dursleys. Therefore we can assume, that the very reason, why 
he didn't even try was said protection. Which is also the reason, why 
I can't agree with Alla's list, why the protection didn't work there. 
It worked as good as it can, and the fact that nothing happens at 
Privet Drive is the proof for this. Voldie didn't even try to break 
the protection. The only time Harry's life was in danger there, was 
when the Dementors arrived, but they were not sent by Voldie or his 
henchmen at this time, but by Umbridge, who had her own agenda.

Also, I really do not think Dumbledore is perfect or almighty, and I 
found it really unconfortable, when he listed of all Sirius' flaws to 
Harry, only an hour or so after Sirius' death. But I still find, that 
you are blowing Dumbledore's failings out of all proportions in your 
post. Blaming for him for not stepping in on the Dursleys or for 
placing Harry there on the first place? Yes. But he's not to blame 
for Hagrid being sent to Azkaban or for the Dementors' attack on 
Harry.

Hickengruendler