Scrimgeour/WerewolfBites/Legilimency/DDsecrecy/DarkMagic/Umbridge/Prefect/etc

[lizzyben04]

No: HPFGUIDX 179771


> Pippin:
> 
> Dumbledore has not yet spoken of his guilt and shame for 
> Ariana's death when he says this...we're supposed to be unsure of
> what Harry is talking about. We've already heard Harry's theory
> that Dumbledore felt responsible for Ariana's death but we don't
> know yet whether it's correct. 

lizzyben:

Actually, they weren't talking about Ariana at all, but Dumbledore's 
obsession with obtaining the Deathly Hallows. "The Hallows, the 
Hallows,"True, true," said DD, "Yet I too sought a way to conquer 
death, Harry... I asked to borrow it, to examine it... and then your 
father died, and I had two Hallows all to myself!"

And IMO Ariana doesn't fit this exchange at all. Harry says DD 
killed people when he couldn't avoid it - ie as casualties of war, 
collateral damage, or ruthless actions. Ariana wasn't someone DD 
killed because he couldn't avoid it; she was an accidental death 
during a fight. I think Harry's referring to the known casualties of 
the Order - Mad Eye Moody, Emmeline Vance, Harry Potter, etc. whom 
DD felt it was necessary to sacrifice for the larger goal. 

Pippin:
> As it turns out, the mere thought that he might learn for certain 
that he 
> was guilty of Ariana's death  almost paralyzed Dumbledore, and yet 
you 
> claim he knows he's killed loads of other people too? I don't buy 
it. 

lizzyben:

This puzzles me, because we know that he *has* allowed/organized the 
deaths of other people as part of the Plan - beginning with Harry 
himself, Moody, Dumbledore, etc. He's hardly paralyzed about doing 
this, but seems quite willing to be responsible for the deaths of 
other people in order to defeat LV. The main difference is that 
Ariana is his own sister, not a puppet; and she died as a result of 
their own stupidity, not a great plan to defeat evil, so it's more 
difficult to rationalize.

> One could just  as well claim that when Lupin said he was too 
dangerous 
> for Tonks he was confessing to murdering Sirius Black. 
> 
> Pippin

lizzyben:

Uh, this part I don't get. Is this the resurrection of ESE!Lupin? :)


Pippin Fowler:

Dumbledore actually confesses to a death that could have been 
avoided, though one can easily disagree with AlD that he was 
responsible for it.

"It is *my* fault that Sirius died," said Dumbledore clearly. "Or I
should say almost entirely my fault--I will not be so arrogant as to
claim responsibility for the whole...."

lizzyben:

Oh, this is the classic example of DD manipulation! I love this 
speech as a template for DD's way of thinking. He's manipulating 
Harry here, as he always does. Of course he confesses for the MOM 
fiasco, something he actually wasn't directly responsible for - but 
does he ever confess to the things he actually has done? No. We 
don't hear about the Harry horcrux here, or the Hallows, etc. 
Instead, DD bravely claims responsiblity for the MOM, but makes sure 
to draw our attention to Snape's failure to get over his grudges, 
Sirius' cruelty to Kreacher, Harry's saving-people-thing, etc. Until 
we're left thinking - "What a great guy DD is, taking the blame even 
though it was really Snape's fault, & Sirius' fault, & Kreacher's 
fault..." Just as you've said. Don't fall for the propaganda! When 
Harry does try to bring up something DD's directly to blame for, DD 
has a very different attitude. 

For example, even Dead!DD fails to bring up the Hallows, preferring 
to distract Harry w/flattery instead. When Harry finally mentions 
them, DD looks worried, & "looked like a small child caught in 
wrongdoing." "Ah, yes," he says, & does not elaborate. Harry 
basically forces him to admit his complicity there - DD wanted to 
avoid the subject totally. DD doesn't want to face his real mistakes.

Magpie:
"Apparently, he can't just say "you've never killed anyone" because 
Dumbledore has been responsible for deaths, they both feel. I see no 
believable reason whatsover for either the characters or the author 
to choose to have them say that Dumbledore did kill if they mean he 
avoided the temptation to kill (Harry would be the first to defend 
Dumbledore if that were the case). Not only is that intentionally 
saying something other than the characters or the author mean, but 
it is imo not how any normal human being would talk."

lizzyben:

Yes, Magpie & Mus have already addressed this point much better than 
I could. Usually, if someone says something to you that contains an 
untrue allegation, you'll correct that untruth. You won't agree by 
saying "true, true". EG - if I'm saying that I'm a bad person & 
someone says "Oh, no, you never robbed gas stations if you could 
avoid it!," I wouldn't agree w/that statement, & I certainly 
wouldn't be *reassured* by it. I'd say "Huh? What are you talking 
about? I've never robbed anyone!!" Like that. The fact that DD 
agrees & is even reassured by Harry's statement is acknowledgment 
that he has killed people in the past. And no, I don't think it's 
Death Eaters. When have we ever heard of DD engaging in direct 
battle with DEs? He's a behind-the-scenes guy. 

Alla:
> Same way here, I think it is reasonable to say if Dumbledore never 
> killed that he never killed if he could avoid it, because it was 
> hard for him to do so. Like he knew he was tempted to kill, but 
> never did, etc.

lizzyben:

No, this doesn't fit DD's character IMO. He's not someone who's 
tempted to kill someone & must restrain himself (that's Snape or 
even Harry). DD's not a violent or angry person at all overall. DD 
is much more cold-blooded & ruthless - he'd kill someone because he 
has to for the Plan, not because it's something he'd prefer to do.

lizzyben:

JKR has stated that DD has been pulling many strings thoughout the 
entire story & IMO this is one example of that. <SNIP>

Alla:

Dumbledore tortured and killed many people? Since you put Morfin and
Hokey among that number, I guess that means that he killed many
other people? Not that I agree that he killed Morfin and Hokey, but
I certainly want to ask whom else he tortured and killed?

lizzyben:

You misunderstood my post. I said that DD has been pulling many 
strings thoroughout the series according to JKR, and Morfin & 
Hokey's deaths could be one example of that. Pulling strings doesn't 
always involve torture & death. Sometimes it involves putting a 
Sorcerer's Stone in Hogwarts to lure Voldemort there, sending Hagrid 
to give Harry some pro-Gryffindor leanings, etc. 

DD usually maintains a distance from the actual deaths anyway, which 
usually occur through intermediaries & agents. It's all about the 
plausible deniability. Quirrel is only person that I'm sure he's 
killed directly.


lizzyben