Cruel, Mean, and Nasty/Follow the Owls: Hedwig/JKR's comments

[Mike]

No: HPFGUIDX 158854

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Magpie" <belviso at ...> wrote:
> 
> Magpie:
> But why?  This thread isn't about judging Dumbledore as a whole,  
> it's people looking at a couple of very specific moments in canon 
> <snip>  
> I don't see how that is studying Dumbledore just by looking at 
> his failings since it's not a study of Dumbledore as a whole.

Mike:
I realize I butchered your post, sorry :) I wanted to draw attention 
to what seems to be a disparate way of viewing things. People are 
perfectly willing to scrutinize DD's every action and to draw 
inferences on the part to paint the whole. This points up what Ken 
was arguing against, and IMO Ken is correct in his reading of the 
thread's thrust.

For instance, calling out Dumbledore for his treatment of the 
Dursleys in 'Will and Won't' (which I found hilarious, not at all 
mean) *is* an attempt to disparage DD on the whole. These are most 
definitely attempts to use single incidents to paint DD as a *Muggle-
baiter*, and many have claimed exactly that. The author clearly was 
going for a little humor and *we* are instead inferring mean-
spiritedness from this passage. Nobody defending DD is claiming 
flawlessness of character, but your defense of "not a study of 
Dumbledore as a whole" rings hollow. People are taking his *flawed* 
actions and inferring a *flawed* whole.

 
> > Ken:
> > If you want to judge DD on his interactions with Muggles I think 
> > a better scene to examine is the one in the orphanage with the
> > headmistress. DD does not come off as perfect there either but 
> > that is at least a normal interaction with a believable, if 
> > minor, character.
> 
> Magpie:
> So don't look at his decision to place Harry with the Dursleys   
> and his disinterest afterwards, but judge him on the orphanage  
> lady he mind zaps and gets drunk because she's got half a clue.  
> I'm seeing some more possible flaws here. I think we should look  
> at both and let peoples' chips fall where they may on how they 
> react to him.

Mike:
Case in point. DD has to go into a Muggle orphanage to offer a 
position to a school of magic and not run afoul of the secrecy 
statutes. He tries to explain things in general terms while not 
stepping over the line. Mrs. Cole is "inconviently sharp" and not 
going to let things happen easily without a better explanation from 
DD. What would you have him do? Did you perceive Mrs. Cole in some 
kind of distress from DD's *mind zap*? That's not the way it reads 
to me. It was more like a genle nudge in the right direction.

This is the paradigm that JKR has set up, this is what wizards do. 
You seem to want to condemn this wizard for using magic to protect 
his world and hers. DD is not torturing Mrs. Cole, yet you accuse 
him of *mind zapping* her. Am I incorrect in interpreting your 
position as one of distaste for DD's use of magic in this instance? 
Is it your position that wizards should not use magic, or maybe just 
not use magic on Muggles? In the series I'm reading, good wizards 
use good magic, yes even on Muggles, to affect good outcomes.

Oh, and JKR carefully explained that Mrs. Cole was no stranger to 
Gin. DD didn't pour the drinks, didn't even offer her the drink, she 
offered DD a drink that DD secretly provided. I wouldn't call him 
getting her drunk, it looks like any attempt to get someone drunk 
was the other way around. Besides, she didn't seem drunk when she 
stood up. Being a little overly dramatic here, aren't you?

Mike