Sirius and Snape parallels again - Sirius' death (LONG) Posted by: "jkoney65"

[juli17 at aol.com]

No: HPFGUIDX 185103



jkoney:
We don't see Dumbledore instructing Quirrel to go get  himself 
possessed by Voldemort. Dumbledore isn't the one who took over  Ginny 
and brought her down to the chamber. In fact DD doesn't know where  
the chamber is. He didn't give Harry the portkey to take him to  
Voldemort. I can't find the logical reason that DD would want Harry 
to  confront Voldemort on his own away from any and all help.

It was  Dumbledore who protected Harry in the atrium at the MoM. He 
didn't kill  Voldemort because he knew he couldn't. He did try to 
capture Voldemort but  he escaped. When Voldemort possessed Harry he 
didn't try to kill Harry.  Harry saves himself at this point by his 
feeling of  love.


Julie:
My problem is that Dumbledore is supposed to be the greatest--and  presumably
the wisest--wizard alive. He's supposed to be perceptive about people. He  is 
a
Legilimens (not sure if this is directly stated, but one presumes he has  
some 
talent at it). Yet we are supposed to believe he is truly unable to  
recognize the
dangers the string of idiots who teach DADA each year bring to Hogwarts  and
to Harry (the personality-altered Quirrel, the conceited and inept  Lockhart, 
the
wishy-washy Lupin--sorry but he was protecting a Sirius he still had reason  
to
believe was a killer, the impersonator of one of his closest friends--who  
also 
happened to be mad!). And if it seems unbelievable that Dumbledore  wouldn't
see something amiss and take some proactive steps to protect Harry,  then we
have to assume that he is being deliberately obtuse and oblivious, willing  
if not
actually pressuring Harry to face all these dangers on his own.   (And I do 
know
Dumbledore sometimes does step in to help--Fawkes, at the MoM--but even  he
isn't always able to do so--Shrieking Shack, the Graveyard.)
 
Of the two, I have great difficulty seeing Dumbledore as completely stupid  or
unaware. It's unbelievable to me that he is really unable to figure out  that 
his
friend Moody isn't his friend Moody. What is more believable for a man of 
Dumbledore's age, experience and intelligence is that he doesn't WANT  to 
look too closely, that he deliberately ignores the signs, that he prefers  to 
take a position of non-interference and allow matters to "take their  course."
I can even understand the concept of allowing Harry to face these growing 
dangers--accepting the chance that if he is incapable or not the chosen  boy
of the prophecy, then he'll die early and allow Dumbledore time to  come up
with another plan to save the Wizarding World--against the hope that  Harry
will learn via "trial by fire" and will ultimately  defeat Voldemort. 
Dumbledore's
own words about the unexpected emergence of concern for  Harry's welfare
complicating his plans supports this scenario. He planned to be a  distant,
uncaring general, sacrificing his individual soldiers in battle so  that he 
might
ultimately win the war. It just didn't work out that way with Harry, though  
it
did with everyone else including Snape, Sirius, Lupin, and the occasional  
student
in the crossfire (Cedric). I'm sure Dumbledore felt a moment of  sadness at 
each
of their deaths, but he deliberately avoided caring too much about any of 
them--except Harry, inadvertently--as to avoid any personal anguish  over 
their
deaths.
 
In some ways, I think Dumbledore was quite a coward. And perhaps what he 
said to Snape ("Sometimes I think we sort too early") applied as much to 
himself as anyone. Methinks he should have been a Ravenclaw (meaning
no disrespect to that house, as cold, clear logic is an asset in a war  
leader).



jkoney
DD took Harry away to protect him. Sirius  was the number one suspect. 
He was supposed to be the secret keeper.  Getting Harry away from him 
is logical.

The charges got cleared  because Voldemort and his people were seen, 
some where captured and Sirius  was fighting against them. Of course 
the minister is going to do  everything possible to put the best spin 
on it and get back in DD &  Harry's good graces.

I still have a problem with the great manipulation  that DD did to 
Harry. DD may have set the pieces up, but Harry made the  final 
decision

Julie:
That is the method of manipulation, isn't it? Setting the pieces  up in the 
most
attractive way, appealing to your subject's weaknesses (Harry's desire to  
save
people, Snape's desire to atone to Lily, etc), and then watching while they 
succumb to your bait. They don't HAVE to do it, you aren't FORCING  them, 
but if it is deliberate and in service to your ultimate goal, then it is  
manipulation, 
whether it is for good or bad. And no one was better at it than Dumbledore, 
though almost every other character had their moments ("The way you get  into 
the Whomping Willow is..."). 
 
Julie 
**************Make your life easier with all your friends, email, and 
favorite sites in one place.  Try it now. 
(http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000010)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]