Dumbledore's Horcrux

[anne_t_squires]

No: HPFGUIDX 171076

> 
> Bart said:
> > ...creating a horcrux is NOT just a matter of committing a
> > murder.  It's a willingness to lose a piece of one's own soul.
> > In general, the only kind of person who could do that is someone
> > who is so out of touch with their own soul that they don't even
> > miss its absence; in other words, a sociopath or psychopath.
> > Dumbledore is neither.
> >
> > Would you become immortal if the price was that you would
> > contract Alzheimers Disease? When you create a horcrux, you may
> > be harder to kill, but you are no longer you, unless you were
> > essentially soulless to begin with.
> 
> Jo:
> Bart, think you're taking this a wee bit too far into the real
> world.
> 
> Perhaps Dumbledore, omniscient as he is, invisible hand guiding
> Harry and his chums, thought he might be needed for the last
> battle.
> 
> I think that splitting his own soul out of necessity would be a
> huge sacrifice, and an unwelcome one, but I think that it is in
> Dumbledore's character to make that sort of sacrifice if it was
> necessary in the bigger picture. 

Anne Squires:

I agree that DD is a master manipulator.  However, I do not think he
is evil or a practitioner of the Dark Arts which he would have to be
in order to have created a horcrux for himself. 

JKR describes DD as the "epitome of goodness" in CBCNewsWorld: Hot
Type, July 13, 2000:

JKR: "I loved writing Dumbledore and Dumbledore is the epitome of
goodness."  

Furthermore, if he had created a horcrux for himself then he would not
have died.  And, JKR has stated unequivocally that DD is dead.

"But I see that I need to be a little more explicit and say that
Dumbledore is definitely ... dead." RCMH2, August 2, 2006.

Thus, DD couldn't have created a horcrux because he is too good, and
furthermore, if he had created one he would not have died.  The
horcrux would have anchored him to this world.


Jo also wrote:
There are so many examples of
> his willingness to make sacrifices like this:
> 
> 1. Employing Trelawney even though students would suffer as she
> is a bad teacher.
> 2. Making Snape kill him (controversial, please don't shoot me
> down!)
> 3. Making Harry live with the Dursleys
> 4. Insisting Sirius his at Grimmauld Place
> 5. Lupin having to spy on the werewolves
> 
> So many other examples...Dumbledore is responsible for the great
> unhappiness of many of our favourite characters, he must have
> made a sacrifice along the way. Maybe the hypothetical Horcrux
> harnesses the compassionate bit of his soul...(this is a joke by
> the way but I still think that Dumbledore may have a Horcrux).
> 
> Jo x
>


Anne Squires again:

1.  Yes, Trelawney is a bad teacher.  She is at Hogwarts for her own
protection.  Also, DD doesn't want LV to get hold of the prophecy.  He
used this ruse to provoke and manipulate LV into showing himself at
the Ministry of Magic in front of the entire Wizarding World.  If LV
had been able to get his hands on Trelawney then everyone might still
believe Fudge and Umbridge that LV had not returned.

2.  I'm not sure he "made" Snape kill him.  I will admit that I tend
to lean this way.  If it's true then DD certainly isn't the "epitome
of goodness" that JKR purports him to be.  I hope we get some more
information about what happened on that tower.  

Having said that, I do, however,  think it's *possible* that DD was
dying anyway----from the injury to his hand, or from the potion that
he made Harry give him in the cave, or a combination of the two.  If
the potion from the cave was killing him then he was protecting Harry
from guilt.  At any rate, I think it's *possible* that he was not long
for this world no matter what.  This way LV will utterly and
completely trust Snape.  Snape is in the perfect position to betray LV
to the Order/Ministry/Good Guys.

Snape  could now be in deep cover.  If DD was already dying and was
suffering then Snape's actions could have been akin to euthanasia. 
IMHO, we don't know enough about what happened on the tower to draw
any firm conclusions or make any condemnations of anyone.  

3.  Honestly, I don't think DD had any real choice when it came to
leaving Harry with the Dursleys.  It did, in fact, keep him alive.  We
know that DEs attacked the Longbottoms after Harry was placed with the
Dursleys.  I am convinced that they also would have sought out and
attacked Harry if he had been anywhere else.  Harry was only "safe"
under the blood protection.  I believe that DD truly regretted the
situation.  If he or any other loving wizard or witch could have taken
Harry **safely** I don't think DD would have hesitated to allow it.

4.  If Sirius had remained hidden at 12GP, as he was specifically
told, he would not have fallen beyond the veil.  He probably would
have been cleared of all charges.  As we begin year seven, if Sirius
had restrained himself in book five, he probably would be a
contributing and active member of the Order.  In the end, LV was
exposed.  Harry and DD were then finally believed.  If Harry said
Wormtail was alive and Sirius Black was innocent, then everyone would
believe the "Chosen One."  DD didn't hurt Sirius in this instance;
Sirius hurt himself.

5. Sometimes when there is a war going on you have to send your
soldiers and spies into dangerous and difficult situations.  Besides,
the members of the Order aren't draftees; they're volunteers.  If
Remus wants to refuse this mission it is his choice to do so.  He is
not being forced.  Ultimately, it's the fact that the Ministry is
making life so unbearable for the werewolves that gives LV a foothold
with them anyway.  DD certainly has nothing to do with that fact that
the Ministry's own policies create allies for LV.

JMHO, Anne Squires