Sirius and Snape parallels again and Dumbledore of course LONG

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 185052

Pippin:
<SNIP>f he had let Sirius run unnecessary risks for the Order, 
wouldn't
he be taking advantage of Sirius's weaknesses? Is it okay if Sirius
wants to risk his life for thrills, but not if he's willing to risk
his happiness to keep himself available for Harry? <SNIP>


Alla:

I do not believe I said that Dumbledore should have let Sirius run 
**unnecessary** risks for the Order. I suggested several tasks which 
are not very risky, however necessary and I believe Sirius would have 
wanted to do them.

So, no, no risking his life for thrills, I do not believe I argued 
that.

Pippin:
It's not that Dumbledore was refusing to let Harry's loved ones risk
themselves. Molly, Arthur and Lupin are all sent into danger, not to
mention Ron and Hermione. But Dumbledore, Snape, Molly, Lupin and
Harry himself all felt that given the opportunity, Sirius would take
risks that were unnecessary. I think if such a diverse group of people
agree on something, it's probably true. And if it is true, then Sirius
would endanger not only himself, but the mission he was sent to
perform. It would have been totally irresponsible of Dumbledore to use
Sirius in that way. <SNIP>

Alla:

I don't know, it seemed to me that they objected against Sirius 
taking unnecessary risks, but NOT against him doing stuff, period. To 
me it seems a bit different. I am not saying that he did not like 
risks, it is Sirius after all, **of course** he did! However, you 
seem to be saying that he would have refused just a job that 
Dumbledore would have given him, even if it was not very risky and 
that I disagree with and I do not believe Harry agreed with you 
either actually.

I also really liked Catlady's suggestion, it seemed that other people 
were sent in different disguises, why not Sirius I am not quite sure.

Alla:
>
> Oh no not such a deft manipulator, just the one IMO as what Lizzyben
describes, the one who plays his psychic trauma over and over again
at other people.

Pippin:

Why single out Dumbledore when the whole wizarding world is guilty?

Alla:

Interesting point, but please see below.

Pippin:
The magical world has locked itself away, and those who can't or won't
stay in the closet are either driven out of civilized society
altogether or imprisoned perforce. It wasn't Albus who decided that
Arianna had to be kept hidden for her own safety. His parents did
that, because they knew the Ministry wouldn't think she could be
trusted to obey the statutes of secrecy.

Alla:

I mean I hear you about whole WW locking themselves away, however 
while I see general similarity, I do not see where in canon we see 
the specific examples of people who want to part the ways with WW and 
are instead being locked up. I mean Sirius is locked up, but not for 
breaking Statute of secrecy, no?

I mean you could be right, however Dumbledore's situation is so very 
specific as nobody else's no? We are talking here about one person 
replaying his psychic trauma on other people (if you agree with the 
premise) and while again I see the parallel in the WW in general, I 
do not see anybody specific doing that besides DD.

Pippin:
Albus rebelled against that, and wanted to lead the wizards out of
hiding. He was weary of looking after Arianna and of trying to keep
Aberforth's behavior in bounds. But if he'd refused to do it, the WW
would have stepped in. The whole wizarding world is repeating the
trauma it suffered in breaking away from the Muggles -- I think JKR
herself said something to this effect. <SNIP>

Alla:

I am not sure how what you just said is relevant to refuting Lizzyben 
original point. Sure Albus rebelled and wanted to do Wizards rule 
Muggle thing, but I mean the trauma that he suffered was Ariana being 
killed in part because she was hidden, no? So what does Albus 
attempted rebellion has to do with it? How is it relevant if you want 
to argue against the argument that Albus wants to lock up all people 
he wants to keep safe because he could not keep Ariana safe?

And I also think JKR said something about WW suffering because being 
in hiding and it is hard for small community, however I am not sure I 
remember about such specific wording, if you have a link I would 
appreciate it.

> Alla:
>
> Really? So what did he have to do for the Order in OOP?

Pippin:
Sirius did participate in strategy meetings. He could have helped
cleanse the house -- it might have been therapeutic for him. He
certainly enjoyed throwing away his parents' possessions.

Alla:

Well, for some reason I think that doing housework just may be a task 
Sirius is extremely unsuited for, but that's just me. I do not 
remember Sirius participating in strategy meetings, except when Molly 
shut him down when he was trying to tell Harry the truth, I am not 
sure if that counts as task for the order. But I know OOP the worst, 
so if you could give me quote I would appreciate it.

Pippin:
Hmmmm. Dumbledore did give Sirius a mission. We don't know how well he
performed it, but we do know that afterward, everyone, including Molly
who hadn't known Sirius in the old days, felt he couldn't be trusted
not to take unnecessary risks.

Sirius never disputed it, either.

Alla:

I do not believe I remember people saying that after Sirius performed 
the mission ( old crowd seemed to be notified, so I would think he 
performed it ok) he cannot take the risks. I seem to remember people 
just saying that now it became so very dangerous for Sirius. So I am 
not sure where the connection was.

Catlady:
<SNIP>
Back in the day, the list thoroughly discussed DD's motive for wanting
Sirius to be killed before Harry's eyes. <SNIP>


Alla:

I agree with a lot of the things about Sirius that you wrote and I 
snipped, but I want to comment on this. I definitely remember list 
discussing Dumbledore getting rid of Sirius deliberately and see this 
was where I drew the line no matter how much I resented a lot of 
things done by Dumbledore. However, after book 7 I cannot put 
anything past Dumbledore. I mean, I want to believe that he would not 
have done it, but I am not sure.

I am not sure whether you think it was okay for Dumbledore to do so, 
IF we assume for the sake of argument that this is what Dumbledore 
indeed did, I however consider it to be a deed of the monster, 
period. There are things I am sure can be done to win a war, however 
I prefer to think that there are things that should never be done 
even if they will help to win a war.

And I know that there are RL armies where the principle every life 
counts does exist (Israeli army comes to mind from what I read), so I 
do not believe that I am living in my idealistic little world and 
unwilling to consider that sometimes one has to dirty their hands to 
win a war. Absolutely, that happens sometimes, however it is one 
thing if they are consenting to kill a comrade with the dangerous 
information in order for that information not to be put in enemy's 
hands. I get all that. But deliberate planning of killing their 
comrade? I do  not know, I mean, after book 7 I for the most part 
cannot stand Dumbledore, but I would still not say that he is the 
same as Voldemort.

This may just do the trick for me, if he wanted to kill Sirius to 
make sure Harry is in enough pain, I would say that Dumbledore is no 
better than Voldemort. 

But that begs another question for me, leaving the morality of that 
act out, I wonder how does that work? How does Dumbledore know that 
this is what is going to happen at the end of the year and that is 
where Sirius will die?

Or did this theory suggest that Dumbledore was just waiting and when 
he decided that time came he told Sirius here, now you can go and die 
there? I am not being sarcastic at all, I am just wondering how that 
is supposed to work.

Catlady:
<SNIP>
I don't think Molly has a right to have an opinion. I think she
forfeited it by her own idiotic reckless behavior. When seeing Harry
off on the Hogwarts Express, Padfoot "reared on to its hind legs and
placed its front paws on Harry's shoulders", which various large dogs
have done to me when they wanted to slobber on me, but Molly "hiss[ed]
'For heaven's sake, act more like a dog, Sirius!'" She didn't even
call him Padfoot! Even without using a name, since when does telling a
dog to act more like a dog soothe enemy suspicions? <SNIP>


Alla:

Me too.


Montavilla47:
<SNIP>
What Dumbledore is faulting Snape for isn't that Snape is
trying to manipulate the situation. He's finding fault because
Snape is indifferent to James and Harry--because Snape lacks
the greatness of heart to care about a person he hates and
one he doesn't know. <SNIP>

Alla:

Hm, when you phrase it like that, it is indeed hard for me to think 
that Snape should care about them. However, when I phrase it for 
myself, I am saying that Dumbledore (and me) is faulting Snape not 
for just **not caring** for James and Harry. I mean, really why 
should he care about his school nemesis who stole a girl from him and 
his son? But no, I think Dumbledore is faulting Snape for not giving 
a damn about their lives, whom he Snape helped to endanger. And yeah, 
if Snape comes to Dumbledore all remorseful for telling a prophecy, I 
would think he should feel remorse for two other lives he endangered 
as well. I am with Dumbledore here definitely.  JMO of 
course.

Pippin:
> But that meant DD would lose two fighters -- was it wrong for him to
> ask what Snape could offer in return?

Montavilla47:
Really, all I can say to that is that if Dumbledore was thinking
only about the number of his fighters, then he has no business
faulting Snape for his indifference to James and Harry.

Alla:

I have no clue whether Dumbledore was thinking in terms of his 
fighters only or not, I would not be surprised if he did. However, 
even if he was thinking only in terms of losing two fighters, I would 
still say that he has an absolute right to fault Snape for his 
indifference to James and Harry. Because to me there is a ton of 
difference between thinking that "Oh man, if Lily and James die, I am 
not sure I care that two wonderful or not so wonderful human beings 
may die, but I care that I can lose two experienced fighters" AND 
thinking " Oh man, I gave the prophecy to Voldemort and now Lily and 
her husband and baby  may die. I am so sorry that Lily may die, but I 
do not give a flying fig if that bastard James and Harry will"

Dumbledore did not endanger Lily and James that would warrant them to 
go in hiding. He may not see behind loosing his fighters, but I do 
not believe that he should feel a huge remorse about his behavior, if 
that makes sense. I mean, I do not LIKE it one bit, but I cannot 
compare his (if it is his mindset) and Snape's at all. 
JMO,
Alla